Nominal IndexA Muthupandi v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 120Susamma Baby v. State and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 121K Udhayakumar v. The District Collector and another, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 122M Syed Ali Fathima v. State and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 123R Radha and another v The State and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 124Susila and others v. S Thirumalai and others, 2023 LiveLaw...
Nominal Index
A Muthupandi v. State, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 120
Susamma Baby v. State and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 121
K Udhayakumar v. The District Collector and another, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 122
M Syed Ali Fathima v. State and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 123
R Radha and another v The State and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 124
Susila and others v. S Thirumalai and others, 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 125
Reports
Case Title: A Muthupandi v. State
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 120
While dealing with an appeal challenging the conviction in a rape case, the Madras High Court recorded its displeasure at the manner in which cross-examination is being carried out in the trial courts. It is quite unfortunate that the trial court advocates are not developing their skills of cross examination, said the court.
Justice Anand Venkatesh said that the art of cross-examination was considered a crown in advocacy skills and if this art is lost, the charm of conducting a trial before a court will also be lost.
Case Title: Susamma Baby v. State and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 121
While dismissing a habeas corpus petition filed by the wife of a pastor who was detained under The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Forest Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, for sexually assaulting a physically and mentally challenged minor girl, the Madras High Court observed that the facts of the case "shocked the judicial conscience".
The division bench of Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice KK Ramakrishnan added that, for invoking the Detention Act, the propensity of the act was more important than the habitual nature of the offence as the definition of “Sexual Offender” did not demand habituality.
Case Title: K Udhayakumar v. The District Collector and another
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 122
While dealing with a Public Interest Litigation seeking action against government officials for alleged misappropriation of funds under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojaya – Gramin (PMAY-G), the Madras High Court observed that the scheme was intended to provide houses to weaker sections of the society and strict action must be taken against officials who were misappropriating the funds under the scheme.
The division bench of Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice Victoria Gowri of the Madurai bench took note of the submissions made by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department that steps have been taken to appoint verification officers in the cadre of Assistant Directors and Deputy Collectors to ensure proper implementation of the scheme.
Case Title: M Syed Ali Fathima v. State and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 123
The Madras High Court recently observed that rehabilitation or de-addiction centres can be run only after obtaining proper permission and necessary licenses and that the social welfare officer is duty-bound to inspect such places regularly to safeguard the public interest.
Justice SM Subramaniam made the observation on a plea by a woman claiming compensation from the Director of the Institute of Mental Health for her husband’s death while he was admitted at the Ever Green Rehabilitation Centre in Kovilambakkam, Chennai. It was alleged that the petitioner’s husband was brutally attacked by the management of the Centre before his death.
Case Title: R Radha and another v The State and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 124
Citing the delay in listing 'vacate stay' applications, the Madras High Court recently came down heavily on its Registry. The court remarked that the Registry should ensure that these applications are listed periodically to ensure speedy disposal of the same as contemplated under Article 226(3) of the Constitution.
Justice SM Subramaniam noted that the pendency of such vacate stay petitions has caused huge financial loss to the State Exchequer and that parties should not be allowed to take advantage of these interim stays depriving the other party of its rights.
The court also pointed out that collusion by the Registry staff could not be ruled out and that such corrupt practices should not prevail. The court added that periodical inspections and thorough inquiry was necessary to ensure that case papers are properly maintained. The court also added that sometimes, the case papers are intentionally mixed up with other case papers to ensure that the cases remain unlisted.
Case Title: Susila and others v. S Thirumalai and others
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 125
While upholding the compensation awarded to the second wife of a man who died in a road accident, the Madras High Court recently observed that for the purpose of claiming compensation under Section 166(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the establishment of loss of dependency was sufficient.
Justice R Vijayakumar pointed out that under the Act, the basis for entitlement of compensation was dependency. Thus, even a legal heir who was not dependent upon the deceased would not be entitled to receive compensation.
The court added that the Act was a benevolent legislation and thus it should be interpreted in a liberal manner to provide monetary relief to the victims and thus serve its real purpose.
Other Developments
Case Title: XYZ and others v. Kalakshetra Foundation and others
Case No: WP 11764 of 2023
The Madras High Court on Monday said that it will decide on reconstituting the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) to look into the allegations of sexual harassment against the faculty of the Kalakshetra Foundation.
"I have decided to form a committee. For the interest of the students, we have to protect the foundation. The Foundation has a respectable name, and has had a long standing. Its name should be protected for all the girls studying there and for their well-being. We must ensure that the interest of all the students, studying in the institute/coming out of the institute, is protected," the court said.
Justice M Dhandapani made the observations during the hearing of a plea filed by a group of students from Rukmini Devi College of Fine Arts, functioning under Kalakshetra Foundation, who had approached the court for formulation of proper safety policies and redressal mechanisms in the college.
Amid the rising cases of COVID-19 in the country, Acting Chief Justice T Raja of the Madras High Court on Tuesday urged all the lawyers appearing in the courts to wear masks when not arguing.
Justice Raja also asked why many lawyers were still crowding the court halls in spite of the availability of a hybrid system. The judge also revealed that three to four judges of the high court have already tested positive for the coronavirus.
While hearing a suo moto public interest litigation related to the traffic chaos caused on the Loop Road by fish stalls, the Madras High Court said that the fishermen, who had put up stalls on both sides of the roads, cannot not claim a traditional right over the roads without any statutory backing.
The division bench of Justice SS Sundar and Justice PB Balaji had last week ordered removal of all fish stalls encroaching both the sides of the road within a week. The court had also directed the Chennai Corporation to find out if the fish stalls running along with pavements and selling fish meals and other dishes had proper licenses.
The court added that some persons with vested interests were trying to mislead the fishermen, making them believe that they had a right to encroach public roads. The court added that some of the illegal eateries were preparing food in unhygienic conditions.
SC Collegium Recommends Justice S V Gangapurwala As Chief Justice Of Madras High Court
The Supreme Court collegium comprising of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, K M Joseph, M R Shah and Ajay Rastogi on Wednesday proposed the appointment of Justice SV Gangapurwala as the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court. In a separate resolution, the collegium reiterated its earlier proposal to transfer the Acting Chief Justice of Madras High Court T Raja to Rajasthan High Court.
In the process, the collegium has recalled its earlier proposal to transfer Dr Justice S Muralidhar, Chief Justice of Orissa High Court as the Madras High Court Chief Justice.
Transfer Justice T Raja From Madras HC To Rajasthan HC At The Earliest : SC Collegium Reiterates
The Supreme Court Collegium has reiterated the transfer of Justice T Raja, Acting Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to the Rajasthan High Court.
Justice T Raja, who will attain superannuation on May 24 this year, assumed the office of Acting Chief Justice of Madras High Court in September 22, 2022 and has continued in office since then
Through a resolution dated November 16 2022, the collegium had proposed the transfer of Justice Raja to the High court of Rajasthan. Justice Raja had sought a reconsideration of the same. However, through another communication dated November 24, 2022 the collegium affirmed its earlier decision.
In its resolution the collegium insisted that the proposal be given effect to at the earliest so that it does not cause any impediment to the appointment of Justice S V Gangapurwala as the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court.