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...
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 that any letter given to a police officer admitting guilt is hit by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act. The court observed that in the present case, though it was said by the prosecution, it appeared that the letters were brought in only to fill up the lacuna in the prosecution, which could not be allowed.
Case Title: Pallab Sinha and another v The Deputy Director
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 354
The Madras High Court recently observed that Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act had wider reach and that money laundering would include any activity or process of dealing with proceeds of crime, either directly or indirectly. The court made it clear that the offence was not limited to the final act of integrating tainted money into the economy.
Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam noted that the wording of Section 3 should not be read conjunctively merely because the definition uses the word 'and'. The court added that if such an interpretation was accepted, the whole Section would be rendered less effective as one person would possess the proceeds of crime and another would project it as tainted money so that neither would be covered under the Act. The court thus observed that PMLA could be invoked against a person, who was no longer in possession and enjoyment of proceeds of crime.
Case Title: M/s Shivpad Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. The Deputy Commissioner
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 355
The Madras High Court stated that an appeal cannot be rejected solely due to the failure to upload documents on the GST portal if the delay or failure is due to technical errors on the portal.
The Bench of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “….an appeal should not be rejected without affording the parties an opportunity to be heard, particularly when the rejection arises from technical issues beyond their control.”
Case Title: Prof. Dr.Samy Thiyagarajan v The Chief Secretary and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 356
The Madras High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the policy of the Government of Tamil Nadu celebrating the birthday of Thiruvalluvar on the 2nd day of Thai which was also declared a public holiday. The petitioner had sought to celebrate Thiruvalluvar's birthday on the Tamil star “Anusham” in the Tamil Month of “Vaikasi”.
Justice M Dhandapani said that since there was no evidence to know the exact birth date of Thiruvalluvar, the court could not issue such directions to the State.
The court agreed with the State's submission that the government policy was only to celebrate Thiruvalluvar and his greatness and nowhere the State mentioned that the day was to be celebrated as the birthday of Thiruvalluvar.
OTHER DEVELOPMENTS
Case Title: Aunestraja v The State of Tamil Nadu and Others
Case No: CRL OP(MD) No.14942 of 2024
The Madras High Court has impleaded the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, the Secretary to Government, School Education Department and the Commissioner of Food Safety and Drug Administration in Tamil Nadu in a plea dealing with rampant use of cool lip tobacco products amongst school kids in the State.
Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a bail petition filed by a man who was found in possession of 27 packets of cool lip tobacco products. He was thus charged for offences punishable under Section 123 of the BNS and Section 24 (1) of the Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act 2003.
The court noted that of law, it was witnessing the seizure of a large quantity of cool lip products. The court also noted that in some videos, schoolchildren were seen using tobacco products which then led to them sitting in a dazed condition. The court noted that using these products would eventually lead to schoolchildren going further for Ganja and other narcotic substances.
Case Title: Suo Motu Writ Petition v Chief Secretary and Others
Case No: WP 19030 of 2024
The Madras High Court on Thursday orally remarked that when people living in the mainland are enjoying hi-tech facilities, the people belonging to scheduled caste and scheduled tribe communities, living in the Kalvarayan Hills should be getting at least the basic amenities for leading a decent life.
The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice N Mala was hearing a suo motu writ petition taken up by the court in the aftermath of the Kallakurichi illicit arrack tragedy which took the lives of many. The court had taken up the suo motu writ petition after noting that the people living in the Kalvarayan Hills were often forced to engage in the business of illicit arrack as they did not have any other means of livelihood.
Case Title: AP Suryaprakasam v State of Tamil Nadu and Others
Case No: 25034 of 2024
The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu government to make ex gratia payments to victim school girls who were sexually assaulted in a fake NCC camp conducted in Krishnagiri District.
The bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji was hearing a public interest litigation filed by Advocate AP Suryaprakasam seeking a CBI inquiry into the case. The directed the State to make the ex-gratia payments to the credit of the Mahila Court which had already granted interim compensation from the Victim compensation scheme of the Government.
The court ordered a compensation of Rs. 5 lakh each to two minor girls who were subjected to penetrative sexual assault and Rs 1 lakh each to the other victim girls. The court added that it was upon the state to recover these amounts from the schools that had allowed the fake camps to be conducted.
Madras High Court Reserves Orders On Pleas Seeking CBI Probe Into Kallakurichi Hooch Tragedy
Case Title: IS Inbadurai v The Chief Secretary and Others
Case No: WP 16519 of 2024
The Madras High Court has reserved orders on a batch of pleas seeking CBI inquiry into the Kallakurichi Hooch Tragedy which claimed around 68 lives.
The bench of Acting Chief Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice PB Balaji reserved the orders on pleas filed by I.S Inabadurai, K Balu, Dr A Sridharan, A Mohan Doss, and B Parthasarathy.
The petitioners had argued that the state machinery had failed in tackling the sale and consumption of spurious liquor. It was contended that hooch tragedy incidents were not new to the state and that the entire system of Tamil Nadu including the police, revenue authorities, etc had failed which was evident from the preset incident in Kallakurichi.
Case Title: S Sushma and another v Director General of Police and others
Case No: WP No. 7284 of 2021
The Madras High Court recently asked the Ministry of Women and Child Development to act upon the draft module submitted by the NCERT enabling transgender issues to be studied at school level. The court noted that the draft module had been forwarded to the Ministry but had been pending since almost two years.
Justice N Anand Venkatesh remarked that a lot of effort had taken to prepare the draft module which provided for integrating the concerns of transgender persons in schooling processes. The court added that its initial objective was to make the module operational during the current academic year, the Ministry was yet to react on the same. The court thus said that the Ministry was expected to show more sensitivity to the issue.
The Central government has notified teh appointment of five additional judges, including Justice Victoria Gowri as permanent judges of the Madras High Court.
On September 10, 2024, the Supreme Court Collegium had recommended making the five additional judges permanent. The Madras High Court Collegium had unanimously resolved to make the judges permanent on 29th April 2024. The Chief Minister and the Governor concurred with this recommendation following which a judge of the Supreme Court was consulted and the decision was taken.
Centre Notifies Transfer Of Justice Shamim Ahmed From Allahabad High Court To Madras High Court
The Central Government has notified the transfer of Justice Shamim Ahmed from Allahabad High Court to the Madras High Court.
On August 30, the Supreme Court Collegium had recommended the transfer of Justice Shamim Ahmed to the Madras High Court. The collegium had initially made recommendations on 21st August 2024. Though Justice Ahmed had requested the collegium to reconsider his transfer, the collegium rejected his request and reiterated its resolution.
Centre Notifies Elevation Of 3 Judicial Officers As Madras High Court Judges
The Centre has notified the appointment of three judicial officers as the Judges of the Madras High Court.
They are :
(i) Ms R Poornima,
(ii) Shri M Jothiraman, and
(iii) Dr (Smt) Augustine Devadoss Maria Clete.