1 Oct 2023 8:24 AM GMT
Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 278 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 295 NOMINAL INDEX S Zahir Hussain v The State and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 278 C Raja v State and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 279 Arulmigu Kalasalingam College of Education v The Appeal Committee, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 280 H Kalyan Singh vs. Dr Nirmalkathri and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 281 M/s. Hotel Saravana...
Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 278 To 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 295
S Zahir Hussain v The State and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 278
C Raja v State and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 279
Arulmigu Kalasalingam College of Education v The Appeal Committee, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 280
H Kalyan Singh vs. Dr Nirmalkathri and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 281
M/s. Hotel Saravana Bhavan v. The Additional Chief Secretary, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 282
SA Syed Shaik Alaudeen v State and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 283
Mr Badhrisheshathiri v State, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 284
Kalyani v The Additional Director and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 285
Saibunisha (Died) and Another v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 286
Mrs. Pista Kanwar v The Inspector of Police and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 287
Vinothini v The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 288
Swamiji v The Chief Secretary and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 289
Sri Kamatchi Amman Devasthanam v Department of Hindu Religious Institutions and Wakf, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 290
Punjab National Bank v. R Lalitha and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 291
Dr. Krithika B v. Additional Chief Secretary, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 292
P Arunachalam(Died) and Others v The Deputy Superintendent of Police, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 293
BSF Ex-Servicemen Welfare Association v. The District Collector and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 294
Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP v M/s. Rasnam Foods Pvt Ltd and Others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 295
Madras High Court Quashes Lawyer’s Detention Under COFEPOSA, Says Live And Proximate Link Had Snapped
Case Title: S Zahir Hussain v The State and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 278
While setting aside a preventive detention order made by the State for detention of a lawyer in connection with smuggling under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act 1974, the Madras High Court noted that the live and proximate link between grounds of detention and purpose of detention had snapped.
Justice M Sundar and Justice R Sakthivel noted that while the proposal was made by the Sponsoring Authority on November 6, 2010, the detention order was made by the Detaining Authority only on December 30, 2010, after nearly eight weeks. Thus, relying on the Supreme Court ruling in Sushanta Kumar Banik Vs. State of Tripura & others, the court observed that the live and proximate link had snapped.
Advocates Tend To React Aggressively Due To Profession, Shouldn't Be Prosecuted For It: Madras HC Quashes FIR Against Lawyer For Obstructing Survey
Case Title: C Raja v State and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 279
While quashing an FIR filed against an advocate for obstructing revenue officials from carrying out a survey, the Madras High Court noted that though the advocate had acted strongly, his intention was not to prevent the Government Officials from performing their duties but to protect and safeguard the rights of his client.
Justice Anand Venkatesh also observed that since the legal profession involves fighting for client’s rights, Advocates usually tend to act more aggressively even outside courts. He added that the demeanour of an advocate was always different from that of a layman due to the nature of his work which requires him to react to situations boisteriously.
“Students Cannot Be Put To Injury”: Madras High Court Directs Special Exams For Students Admitted In College Without Recognition
Case Title: Arulmigu Kalasalingam College of Education v The Appeal Committee
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 280
The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Teachers Education University to conduct special exams for the students of Arulmighu Kalasalingam College of Education who were admitted in the academic year 2021-2022, while the college did not have recognition.
Considering the plight of the students, the bench of Justice SS Sundar and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy directed the university to conduct the examinations as soon as possible within a period of three months and to declare the results within a further period of two months. The court also directed the college to bear the expenses. The court thus set aside an order of the single judge imposing cost of five lakh on the college saying that the college should suffer the consequences of its actions.
Madras HC Junks Plea Challenging Dismissal Of Complaint Against Ex-Congress MP, ABP News Channel Over 'Defamatory' Post On RSS
Case title: H Kalyan Singh vs. Dr Nirmalkathri and others
Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 281
The Madras High Court recently dismissed a Revision plea filed against a December 2016 order of the Magistrate Court in Chennai dismissing a complaint filed against former Congress MP Nirmal Khatri and ABP News for posting an alleged defamatory post against an RSS worker.
“In the considered view of this Court, the order passed by the Court below does not suffer from apparent illegality or infirmity and it does not require the interference of this Court in the exercise of its revisional jurisdiction,” the bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh observed as it underscored that reviving the complaint at this stage would be like ‘whipping a dead horse’.
Legislation Against Land Grabbing Need Of The Hour, Appoint High Level Committee To Uncover Illegalities In Govt Property Dealings: Madras HC
Case Title: M/s. Hotel Saravana Bhavan v. The Additional Chief Secretary
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 282
While lamenting that lang grabbing by the powerful is an offence against the State and in turn an offence against the people of the State, the Madras High Court stressed on the need to bring in a legislation against land grabbing to ensure criminal prosecution against land grabbers.
Justice SM Subramaniam observed that lands under Government custody had to be used for public welfare but some land grabbers were using the lands for commercial exploitation and personal gains using backhand techniques. This, according to the court is nothing short of “thieving” and such land grabbers should not be permitted to go scot-free.
The court also directed the State Government to appoint a High-Level Committee to identify grabbing of government lands, illegalities and irregularities in dealing with the Government property, recovery of arrears of lease rent, unlawful occupation of Government properties etc., and initiate all appropriate actions including Criminal prosecutions, to protect the financial interest of the State and to safeguard the poor and voiceless people of the State.
Madras HC Refuses Compensation To Lawyer Injured By Police Action On 'Unlawful' PFI March, Says Private Persons Must Also Uphold Rule Of Law
Case Title: SA Syed Shaik Alaudeen v State and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 283
While refusing relief to a lawyer seeking compensation for the injuries he sustained at the hands of the police in connection with a PFI march, the Madras High Court emphasised that law applies not only to the State machinery but also to individuals.
Justice GR Swaminathan of the Madurai bench was constrained to make the statement after noting that the petitioner and other members of the organisation had conducted march from a different site than which was allowed by the police and when the police rushed to the spot, instead of responding in a peaceful manner, the members had exhibited defiance. Thus, the court opined that the assembly was unlawful and the conduct of the organisers was illegal.
“Judiciary Has Broad Shoulders To Take On Any Criticism”: Madras HC While Quashing Criminal Case Against Political Commentator Badri Seshadri
Case Title: Mr Badhrisheshathiri v State
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 284
The Madras High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against political commentator Badri Seshadri for making adverse comments about the Chief Justice of India for taking up suo moto cognisance of the violence in Manipur. Seshadri was arrested on July 29, 2023 and later granted bail on August 1, 2023 by the District Munisff-cum-Judicial Magistrate court in Kunnam.
Justice Anand Venkatesh, who was hearing a plea by Seshadri for quashing the criminal proceedings, observed that the judiciary has very broad shoulders to take on criticism unless they directly interfered with the administration of justice.
The court also said that Seshadri’s comments had to be looked at from the context in which it was made and though he used some expressions which seemed like a verbal attack on the CJI, he had later filed an affidavit in court expressing regret for such statement.
Mother Entitled To Share In Pensionary Benefits Of Deceased Son Even In Absence Of Name In Service Register: Madras High Court
Case Title: Kalyani v The Additional Director and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 285
Coming to the aid of a mother seeking a share of the terminal and pensionary benefits of her deceased son, the Madras High court observed that the mother, being a senior citizen and one of the legal heirs was entitled to a share in the terminal and pensionary benefits.
Though the Director of Ex-Service Men Welfare submitted that the deceased had nominated his wife to receive the death-cum-retirement benefits and gratuity under Rule Rule 48 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules making the mother disentitled to claim any share, the court found the argument to be non-sustainable.
Justice Victoria Gowri of the Madurai bench thus observed,
“The submission made by the learned Special Government Pleader is not sustainable, since the mother/petitioner, being a senior citizen and one of the four legal heirs of the deceased Subramanian, she is entitled to ¼ th share in the all the terminal and pensionary benefits of her son.”
Madras High Court Frames Procedure For Police To Record Witness Statements Through Audio-Visual Electronic Means At Least In Serious Crimes
Case Title: Saibunisha (Died) and Another v. State
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 286
Complying with an earlier order of the Supreme Court and in the interest of criminal justice system, the Madras High court has directed the Principal Secretary, Home Department and the Director General of Police to record statements of witnesses under Section 161 CrPC using audio-visual electronic means, at least in matters involving serious offences.
The court noted that in order to facilitate recording true version of witness’ statement and to prevent growing tendencies of witnesses being threatened, induced, influenced etc, Section 161 CrPC was amended to record statements using electronic means. However, noting that the same was not being implemented the court made the direction.
Husband’s Illicit Relationship With Sister-In-Law Cruelty U/S 498A IPC: Madras High Court Sets Aside Acquittal, Criticises Probe
Case Title: Mrs. Pista Kanwar v The Inspector of Police and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 287
While setting aside the acquittal of a man in a case involving death of his wife by self-immolation, the Madras High Court has observed that the husband’s illicit relation with his elder brother’s wife would amount to cruelty on the wife within the meaning of Section 498A of IPC.
The High Court disagreed with the view taken by the trial court that such relation was only immoral and did not amount to cruelty. The court added that when such illicit relationship was happening inside the house under the pretext of “motherly affection” and which was witnessed by the victim herself, the trial court had erred in rendering such a find.
[S.15A SC/ST Act] Victim Need Not Be Put To Notice Of Habeas Corpus Plea Moved By Accused Following Preventive Detention: Madras High Court
Case Title: Vinothini v The Additional Chief Secretary to Government
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 288
The Madras High Court has made it clear that the habeas corpus petition challenging the preventive detention of a person who is accused of committing offences under the Schedules Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is not a 'connected proceeding' for the purposes of Section 15-A(3) and (5) of the Act.
The Sections make provision of notice and opportunity of hearing to the victim for any Court proceeding connected to his/her case, including bail, discharge, release, parole, conviction or sentence of an accused.
Court held that habeas corpus is a constitutional remedy available under Article 226(1) of the Constitution and thus, would not be covered under “proceedings” under the SC/ST Act.
Justice M Sundar and Justice R Sakthivel also observed that though sub-section 5 of Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act talks about connected proceedings, such proceedings would mean conviction, acquittal or sentence and will not cover “connected proceedings”.
Madras HC Orders 25 Lakh Compensation For Man's Death By Electrocution At Temple Medical Camp, Says Govt Bound To Arrange For Pilgrims Well Being
Case Title: Swamiji v The Chief Secretary and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 289
Granting compensation to man whose son died due to electrocution while on a temple pilgrimage, the Madras High Court emphasised that as per the Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, the local body was obligated to make arrangements for the well-being of the devotees.
Justice GR Swaminathan of the Madurai bench noted that the municipality could not remain content with the collection of license fee and tolls and that it is duty bound to make arrangements for the pilgrims without fear of violation of secularism.
Madras High Court Directs BJP MLAs Accused Of Grabbing Temple Land To Return Possession, Subject Themselves To CID Probe
Case Title: Sri Kamatchi Amman Devasthanam v Department of Hindu Religious Institutions and Wakf
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 290
The Madras High Court has directed two BJP MLAs from Puducherry and their family members to return vacant possession of a temple land allegedly grabbed by them illegally, to Sri Kamatchi Amman Devasthanam.
Justice SM Subramaniam also asked the father-son duo, A John Kumar and Vivilian Richards John Kumar, to subject themselves to probe being conducted by the Crime-Branch of Criminal Investigation Department (CB-CID) to initiate action under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act. This was after Court formed a prima facie view that the preliminary investigation conducted by the agency reveals involvement of criminality.
S.34 SARFAESI Act | Civil Court's Jurisdiction Not Ousted When Remedy Cannot Be Effectively Addressed By Tribunal: Madras High Court
Case Title: Punjab National Bank v. R Lalitha and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 291
While dismissing an application filed under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act to reject a plaint on the ground that the court's jurisdiction was ousted, the Madras High Court observed that the civil court's jurisdiction is not ousted when the remedy sought cannot be effectively addressed by the Tribunal.
Justice RN Manjula noted that the case, which involved rights relating to property could be proved only through an exhaustive trial which was possible only before the Civil court and not the tribunal.
Madras High Court Directs State To Prevent Use Of Stickers Like "Govt Of India", "Police" On Private Vehicles
Case Title: Dr. Krithika B v. Additional Chief Secretary
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 292
The Madras High Court recently observed that the state authorities including the Home department, transport department and police are bound to ensure that stickers and artifacts having “Emblem”, “G”, “Govt of India”, “Government of Tamil Nadu”, “High Court”, “Police” are not used on private vehicles.
Calling such monitoring a continuous process, Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice PD Audikesavalu observed as under,
“Monitoring and survey of such vehicles is a continuous process. The respondent authorities are bound to ensure that the stickers and artifacts containing “Emblem”, “G”, “Govt of India”, “Government of Tamil Nadu”, “High Court” and “Police” and such other institutions, are not being misused and upon detection of the same, action is required to be taken by the authorities.”
1992 Vachathi Crimes: Madras High Court Upholds Convictions Of Police, Forest And Revenue Officials, Orders 10 Lakh Compensation For Rape Victims
Case Title: P Arunachalam(Died) and Others v The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 293
The Madras High Court on Friday (September 29) dismissed the appeals preferred by 126 forest officials, 84 police personnel and 5 revenue officials against their convictions and sentence for various crimes that took place in Vachathi, in Dharmapuri District of Tamil Nadu. Coincidentally, the Sessions Court judgment finding the accused guilty was also passed on September 29 in the year 2011.
Justice P Velmurugan called for stringent action against the then District Collector, District Forest Officer, and the Superintendent of Police.
The bench also directed the state to pay compensation of Rs. 10 lakh each to the rape victims, of which 50% was to be recovered from the accused who were convicted for the offence of rape. The court also directed the state to give suitable employment to the victims whose houses were destroyed by the officials.
Cannot Treat Retired BSF Personnel As “Ex-Servicemen” For Granting Concessions For Consumption Of Liquor In Tamil Nadu: Madras High Court
Case Title: BSF Ex-Servicemen Welfare Association v. The District Collector and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 294
The Madras High Court recently observed that it could not treat retired personnel from the Border Security Force (BSF) as Ex-Servicemen for extending the benefits of exemption and concession granted to Ex-Servicemen as per the The Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937, for the benefits of purchase and consumption of liquor in the State.
The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice PD Audikesavalu observed that as per the existing Act and Rules, the term “Ex-Servicemen” did not include personnel who retired from the para-military force and it was for the Government to make such amendments.
Madras High Court Grants Injunction In Favour Of Sangeetha Hotels, Restrains Former Franchisee From Using “Geetham” And Similar Marks
Case Title: Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP v M/s. Rasnam Foods Pvt Ltd and Others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 295
The Madras High Court has recently granted an ad-interim injunction in favour of Sangeetha Hotel chain, thus restraining its former franchisee from using marks like 'GEETHAM', 'GEETHAM VEG' , 'SANGEETHAM', or any GEETHAM or SANGEETHA formative marks or such similar marks.
Allowing an application filed by Sangeetha, Justice PT Asha observed that a prima facie case was made out and the balance of convenience was in favour of Sangeetha. The court was also satisfied that there was some suppression on the part of the respondents and some of their actions had created confusion in the mind of the public.
Madras High Court Advocates Association Passes Resolution Against CAT Judicial Member, Says She Asked An Advocate To 'Get Out'
In a resolution signed by more than 200 advocates, the Madras High Court Advocates Association has condemned the conduct of the Judicial Member of Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, Ms Lata Baswaraj Patne, stating that she asked a lawyer to “get out”.
In its resolution dated September 26th, the Association said that the utterances made by the member revealed a "deep-seated prejudice and bias" against the members of the Chennai Bar. This was following a Public Interest Litigation filed by the Service Bar Association for issuing around 150 orders in cases where the orders were pronounced in open court but their copies were withheld by the CAT.
Thus, claiming that the bar had lost all faith in the impartiality of the judicial member, and that the conduct of the member showed "utter arrogance" and "lack of judicial temper", the Association has unanimously decided to send a representation to the Chairman of Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi and to the Central Government to transfer the judicial member out of Chennai bench.
Portfolio Changes In Madras High Court : Judge Who Suo Motu Reopened Acquittals Of Politicians Shifted To Madurai Bench
Justice Anand Venkatesh of Madras High Court, who has caused a political stir in the State of Tamil Nadu by deciding to suo motu take up revision of orders acquitting politicians, has now been shifted to the Madurai bench following a portfolio change.
Justice Venkatesh, who was in charge of dealing with criminal appeals and writ petitions relating to criminal cases involving sitting and former MPs and MLAs, will now be handling cases relating to mines and minerals, land laws, RTIs, Freedom Fighters’ Pension Scheme, Agriculture Procedure Market, and other miscellaneous matters. The portfolio that was handled by Justice Venkatesh will now be handled by Dr. Justice G Jayachandran.