Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 385 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 389 NOMINAL INDEX K.A.Meeran Mohideen v Sheik Amjad and others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 385 Abdul Gani Raja v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 386 Jacob v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 387 The Assistant Director (PMLA) v Ashok Anand, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 388 Tmt.S.Sindhu v Tamil Nadu State represented by Drugs...
Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 385 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 389
NOMINAL INDEX
K.A.Meeran Mohideen v Sheik Amjad and others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 385
Abdul Gani Raja v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 386
Jacob v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 387
The Assistant Director (PMLA) v Ashok Anand, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 388
Tmt.S.Sindhu v Tamil Nadu State represented by Drugs Inspector, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 389
REPORTS
Case Title: K.A.Meeran Mohideen v Sheik Amjad and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 385
The Madras High Court has ruled that when a general power of attorney is executed jointly by more than one principal, the death of one principal would not automatically terminate the agency.
Asnwering a reference, the bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice R Sakthivel held that the question of termination would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case and would depend upon the intention of the parties at the time of execution of the power of attorney.
The court observed that if the intention was to continue the power even after death, the agency would continue will the object sought to be achieved is complete and if there was a specific interest in the agency, the agency would be terminated in respect of the principal who dies.
Case Title: Abdul Gani Raja v The State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 386
The Madras High Court recently reiterated that to constitute an offence of rape, penetration using the male organ is not necessary and any penetration using any body part or object or even an attempt to penetrate or manipulate a body part could be considered under rape.
Justice K Murali Shankar observed that post the 2013 amendment to the criminal laws, the definition of rape had become broader. The court noted that while the pre-amendment definition mandated penetration with a male organ to constitute sexual intercourse, this main ingredient was removed by way of the amendment. The court added that the use of fingers, objects or any body part to penetrate or manipulate was sufficient to constitute the offence of rape.
Case Title: Jacob v The State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 387
The Madras High Court recently came to the aid of an octogenarian with Parkinsons disease by directing Special Court for CBI cases to frame charges in a case against him through video conferencing, as per Section 355 of the BNSS.
Justice N Seshasayee observed that merely because a person was facing criminal accusations, it would not imply that he should surrender all his comforts and convenience to participate in the trial proceedings. The court added that it was imperative to make life of litigants least convenient. The court added that courts must always resort to technology whenever possible to make life more convenient for all concerned.
The court added that as per Explanation to Section 355 of BNSS, personal attendance of the accused also included his attendance through audio-video electronic means. The court noted that the explanation showed the need to incorporate and integrate technology into the procedure and it was appropriate for the courts to resort to the same.
Case Title: The Assistant Director (PMLA) v Ashok Anand
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 388
The Madras High Court recently observed that pendency of a criminal appeal against the conviction in a schedule offence is not a bar to proceed wit trial in the PMLA case.
The court stressed that the schedule case and the PMLA case are distinct and different and thus the trial in money laundering case could not be postponed merely on the pendency of a criminal appeal in the schedule case.
The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice AD Maria Clete observed that the offence of money laundering had wider ramifications and could not be equated with offence under penal laws. The court added that though schedule offence is a prerequisite for initiation of proceedings under PMLA, once initiated it became independent and had to be dealt with separately.
Case Title: Tmt.S.Sindhu v Tamil Nadu State represented by Drugs Inspector,
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 389
The Madras High Court recently observed that while the Siddha practitioners in the State of Tamil Nadu were not barred from practicing modern medicine, they could not store allopathy medicine as the same would be in violation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.
The court thus refused to quash a case registered against a Siddha Doctor for storing allopathy medicines in contravention of the Act.
Justice G Jayachandran observed that while there was no bar on Siddha practitioners to practice modern medicine, the case against the doctor was that she had stocked drugs without a license which was in contravention of the Act.
The court noted that as per GO Ms.No.248, issued by the Health and Family Welfare Department on September 8, 2010, the registered members of the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council were permitted to practice modern scientific system of medicine. However, the court noted that as per Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940, any drug could be stored for distribution, sale, exhibition etc only with license issued for the said purpose.
OTHER DEVELOPMENTS
Plea In Madras High Court Seeks Probe Into Data Breach At Star Health Insurance
Case Title: Himanshu Pathak v. Ministry of Electronics and Information and others
Case No: WMP/31369/2024 and WP 12049/2023
A plea has been filed in the Madras High Court raising concerns about the security breach of Star Health Insurance Limited. An interim injunction petition has also been filed to suspend the online operation of Star Health Insurance.
When the matter was taken up by Justice Dhandapani on Monday, the judge said that he would hear the case on Thursday (17th October) and pass orders on whether the Central Government had authority to take action against the insurance company.
The petitioner, Himanshu Pathak, founder of cyber security firm CyberX9, had approached the court to direct the Ministry of Home Affairs to take action based on the representation sent by him regarding security breach by Star Health Insurance. Pathak had alleged that there were critical vulnerabilities in the cyber security of Star Health.
On October 9 this year, the Insurance Company had admitted that it was a victim of malicious cyber attack which resulted in unauthorised and illegal access to data.
Case Title: The Secretary v B Selvam and Another
Case No: WA (MD) 1471 of 2024
The Madurai bench of Madras High Court has removed the critical remarks made against Senior Advocate P Wilson in its order dated September 26 when the latter pointed out a possible conflict of interest in a case.
The bench of Justice R Subramanian and Justice Victoria Gowri ordered the registry to delete the remarks against the Senior Advocate after the counsel on record for the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission submitted a memo stating that the counsels never intended to seek for a recusal of the judge and were merely laying down the facts of the case before the bench. The bench also asked the registry to place the matter before another division bench as per the orders of the Chief Justice.
With respect to the circulation of video clippings from the court hearing, Justice Subramanian said that the computer committee was already seized of the matter and that the police had also launched investigation into the unauthorised recording of the court hearing and its circulation.
Case Title: K Jayaprakash v The Commissioner and Others
Case No: WP No. 30474 of 2024
The Madras High Court on Thursday directed the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department to take action against the temple trustee and employees of the Devi Karumari Amman Temple at Tiruverkadu who recorded Instagram reels inside the temple.
Justice M Dhandapani wondered how the temple trustee herself could engage in such acts inside the temple, which is visited by hundreds of devotees. Noting that the temple trustee and the employees should not have behaved this way, the judge opined that appropriate action should be initiated against them.
The court thus asked the Commissioner and the Executive Officer of the temple to submit an action taken report by October 29.
Case Title: Muthuvelayudha Perumal Appavu @ M. Appavu v RM Babu Murugavel
Case No: Crl OP 25334 of 2024
Tamil Nadu Speaker M Appavu has approached the Madras High Court to quash the defamation proceedings initiated based on the complaint of AIADMK Official Spokesperson Babu Murugavel.
When the matter came up for hearing on Thursday, Justice G Jayachandran asked the respondent, Babu Murugavel to respond to the plea and explain how the statements made by the speaker amounted to defaming the AIADMK party.
Murugavel had filed the complaint alleging that on November 11, 2023, Appavu, at a press release function at Muthamizh Peravai, Chennai had defamed the AIADMK party by claiming that 40 MLAs of the party were ready to switch over to the DMK after the demise of Dr J. Jayalalithaa. Murugan had thus filed the complaint before the Special Judge for the trial of cases related to MPs and MLAs alleging that Appavu had committed offenses punishable under Section 499 and Section 500 of the IPC.
A plea has been filed in the Madras High Court seeking a direction to the Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister Udayanidhi Stalin to adhere to the formal dress code while discharging his official functions.
The plea, filed by Advocate Sathya Kumar states that as per G.O (Ms) No. 67 of 2019 dated 1st June, 2019 issued by the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, all government servants are required to wear neat, clean and formal attire that is appropriate to workplace setting so as to maintain the decorum of the office. As per the GO, male employees are to wear shirts with formal pants or veshti (dhoti) reflecting Tamil culture or any Indian traditional dress.
The plea says that Udayanidhi Stalin, who is the Minister for Youth Welfare and Sports Development in the State and who has been recently appointed as the Deputy Chief Minister of the State, is seen wearing a casual T-Shirt in all Government programmes, in the ministerial office and in Deputy Chief Minister's Cabin "as against the dress code prescribed in the Tamil Nadu Secretariat Office Manual".