Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 16 to September 22, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 349 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 356 NOMINAL INDEX Mohammed Saifullah v Reserve Bank of India and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 349 Swiss Garniers Genexiaa Sciences Pvt Ltd v. Avant Garde Healthcare and Engg Solutions Pvt Ltd, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 350 Jaffer Sadiq v The Assistant Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 351 A.Nivetha v The Secretary to Government and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 352 R Lalithsharma v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 353 Pallab Sinha and another v The Deputy Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 354 M/s Shivpad Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. The Deputy Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 355 Prof. Dr.Samy Thiyagarajan v The Chief Secretary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 356 REPORT Police Cannot Order Freezing Of Bank Account Without Quantifying Amount Involved In Financial Fraud, Violates Right To Trade: Madras HC Case Title: Mohammed Saifullah v Reserve Bank of India and Others Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 349 The Madras High Court has recently ruled that the investigating agency cannot order freezing the entire bank account of a person involved in a financial fraud without quantifying the amount involved in the fraud. Justice G Jayachandran ruled that such orders freezing the entire amount would be construed as a violation of the fundamental right of trade and business as well as a violation of livelihood. The court added that though the statute empowers investigation agencies to request banks to freeze accounts, it was a looming question whether this power was being exercised properly. The court added that the freezing of accounts was an issue faced by many citizens of the country and the citizens were often taken by surprise by orders of freezing their accounts. The court added that in many cases, by the time the account holders come to know of the purpose for which their accounts are frozen, enough damage would have been caused to their financial life since their business itself gets affected by the unilateral orders. [MSMED Act] Statutory Authority Can Only Entertain Dispute If Supplier Was Registered Under The Act During Relevant Period: Madras HC Case Title: Swiss Garniers Genexiaa Sciences Pvt Ltd v. Avant Garde Healthcare and Engg Solutions Pvt Ltd Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 350 The Madras High Court recently ruled that the statutory authority under the Micro, Small, Medium, Enterprises Development Act, 2006 would have jurisdiction to entertain disputes only when the supplier had been registered under the Act at the relevant point of time. Justice K Kumaresh Babu thus allowed an application filed by Swiss Garniers Genexiaa Sciences Pvt Ltd to waive off the requirement to pay 75% pre-deposit amount under Section 19 of the Act. PMLA Accused Need Not Be Produced Before Special Court Within 24 HoursIf Arrested From Judicial Custody: Madras High Court Case Title: Jaffer Sadiq v The Assistant Director Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 351 The Madras High Court recently dismissed the petition filed by former DMK functionary Jaffer Sadiq challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a PMLA case. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that requirements under the Act had been met when Sadiq, who was already in judicial custody, was formally arrested. Thus, the court said that the petition was devoid of merits and dismissed the same. Madras High Court Directs Tamil Nadu Veterinary And Animal Sciences University To Not Reject Candidate's Application For Being Transgender Case Title: A.Nivetha v The Secretary to Government and Others Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 352 The Madras High Court has recently directed the Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University not to reject a candidate's application on the grounds of being transgender. Justice M Dhandapani was hearing a petition filed by A Nivetha challenging the prospectus issued by the University for admission to undergraduate degree programs. Nivetha had sought to quash the prospectus as being illegal as it did not categorize transgenders as a special category. Nivetha had applied for the course of Bachelor of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry on June 26, 2024 which was received by the university. However, on noting that the admission notification issued by the University had no clauses regarding the admission of transgender persons, Nivetha approached the High Court. Letter Given To Police Officer Admitting Guilt Hit by Section 25 Of Evidence Act, Not Admissible As Evidence: Madras High Court Case Title: R Lalithsharma v State Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 353 The Madras High Court has recently set aside an order of the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, which had allowed a petition filed by the prosecution to receive two documents as additional documents, one of which was a letter admitting guilt given to the police. Justice Nirmal Kumar noted ...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 16 to September 22, 2024

Upasana Sajeev

Tags