Madras High Court Monthly Digest: February 2024

NOMINAL INDEX

XXXX v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 51

H Santhosh v The District Collector, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 52

Pay Perform India Private Limited v The Union of India and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 53

M/s.India Cements Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 54

Flow Link Systems Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 55

Chairman and Managing Director, UCO Bank v K Marimuthu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 56

TN Medical Laboratories Association v Principal Secretary and others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 57

SR Sathyanarayana Rao v The District Collector and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 58

E Shakthi Murugan v District Collector, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 59

Madurai Mavatta Devendra Kula Velalar Uravinmurai Sangam v The Secrertary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 60

M/s.Supreme Paradise Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 61

CPF (INDIA) Private Limited Verses Addl. CIT, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 62

Varun and another v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 63

K Annamalai v V Piyush, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 64

M/s.Thillai Agencies Versus State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 65

Gopal Vittal, Bharti Airtel Ltd v Kamatci Shankar Arumugam, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 66

S Gurumoorthi v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 67

Nithesh Chaudhari v The Special Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 68

Buhari @ Kichan Buhari v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 69

Rajesh Das v State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 70

Abhijit Majumder v Inspector of Police and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 71

Tvl. Renault Nissan Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner (ST) (FAC), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 72

The Under Secretary to Govt v RK Venkatachalam and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 73

Siva and Others v State and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 74

Dr. Shri Harish v Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 75

(T) CMA (PT) No.88 of 2023 (OA/14/2017/PT/CHN), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 76

G Bhagavath Singh v The Commissioner of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 77

N Ilango v The Chief Secretary, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 78

XYZ v Kalakshetra Foundation and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 79

C Rasu v The Principal Secretary and Commissioner, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 80

Tvl.Transtonelstory Afcons Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT), 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 81

Dharma v Inspector of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 82

The State v I Periyasamy, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 83

Krishapriya Foundation v The Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 84

Union of India v The Deputy Director, UIDAI, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 85

S Lakshmipathy v The State and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 86

V Senthil Balaji v Deputy Director, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 87

ABC v XYZ, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 88

The Secretary to Government and Others v Regina, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 89

Suthendraraja T @ Santhan v The Secretary and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 90

REPORTS

Allowing Trial To Continue Without Identifying Accused Would Embarrass & Vilify Victim, Resulting In Mockery Upon Womanhood: Madras HC Quashes Sexual Abuse Case

Case Title: XXXX v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 51

The Madras High Court recently quashed a sexual harassment case under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The court added that since the accused person had not been identified for 3 years, continuing the proceedings would be a mockery upon womanhood and bring further embarrassment to the woman who would be put to mental agony.

Justice Anand Venkatesh also lamented that in many sexual abuse cases, not many were willing to come to court and fight against the abuse and even if a few came forward to fight, the system was not very friendly. The court added that in many cases, the victim ended up facing a double whammy by suffering sexual abuse and embarrassment in the court. The court also remarked that this was more of a punishment for the victim.

Revenue Authorities Not Empowered To Issue “No Caste, No Religion Certificate”: Madras High Court

Case Title: H Santhosh v The District Collector

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 52

The Madras High Court recently observed that while a person could choose not to mention his caste and religion in his documents, the revenue authorities were not empowered to issue a “No Caste No Religion Certificate”. The court observed that issuance of such a certificate will be construed as a general declaration and the Revenue Authorities could not do so in the absence of any powers conferred by the Government.

Justice SM Subramaniam added that the Tahsildars could not issue certificates at their whims and fancies and such unguided powers would lead to administrative anarchy and unconstitutionality.

While the court appreciated the man's desire to secure such a certificate, the court noted that the government did not confer any powers on the Tahsildar to issue a certificate of such nature and in the absence of such powers, the court could not issue directions while exercising its powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution.

S. 6 PMLA | Adjudicating Authority Is Not Judicial Or Quasi-Judicial Tribunal Merely Because Procedure Followed Has Judicial Colour: Madras High Court

Case Title: Pay Perform India Private Limited v The Union of India and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 53

The Madras High Court recently held that the Adjudicating Authority under Section 6 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was neither a judicial nor a quasi-judicial tribunal merely because the procedures followed by the authority had some “judicial colour” to it.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a plea challenging the constitutionality of Section 6(2), 6(3)(a)(ii), and 6(5)(b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002.

Thus, the court observed that the adjudicating authority was an original authority exercising the administrative function under the Act. The court thus opined that the adjudicating authority was in place as a check and balance to ensure that the power was not solely exercised by the investigating officer.

Electricity Qualifies As Input For Grant Of CENVAT Credit: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.India Cements Limited Versus Commissioner of Customs

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 54

The Madras High Court has held that electricity qualifies as an input for the grant of CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 (CCR).

The Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice R. Vijayakumar have observed that the captive power plant has been set up at substantial cost by the appellant at one of the company locations. The electricity generated has been used as 'input' only within the appellant group of companies, though at different locations. The consumption is in pari materia with the power generation, and there is no inflated claim.

The court held that the electricity generated has been wheeled through the grid, and thus the process of supply to each of the sister units is transparent and in accordance with the terms and procedures under the wheeling agreement entered into with TANGEDCO. Being related parties and units of one company, it is possible for there to be a check on the methodology adopted by the parties for the transfer of the input, the utilization of the 'input' itself, and all other relevant determinants by the department.

Refund Claim Has To Be Examined Based On Documents Pertaining To Availing Of ITC And Export Of Products On Zero Rated Basis: Madras High Court

Case Title: Flow Link Systems Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 55

The Madras High Court, while remanding the matter, held that the refund claim has to be examined and determined based on documents pertaining to the availing of ITC as well as the export of products on a zero-rated basis.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has observed that the petitioner/assessee has made the refund claims on time and cannot be faulted for the delayed processing of claims by the department.

Lawyers Empanelled By Banks Do Not Hold Civil Post, Reservation Under Article 16 Not Applicable To Their Appointment: Madras High Court

Case Title: Chairman and Managing Director, UCO Bank v K Marimuthu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 56

The Madras High Court recently held that the lawyers empanelled by the banks to represent them in cases do not hold a civil post and thus the laws of reservation will not be attracted during their appointment.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy thus set aside an order of a single judge made last year where the single judge had observed that the right to be considered for appointment was a fundamental right and had directed the banks to review their existing procedures for empanelment of lawyers.

The division bench, however, held that the relationship between the banks and the empanelled lawyers was purely professional and not that of a master and servant. The court observed that the empanelled lawyers were not covered by any service laws and their services were purely on a contractual basis. The court added that the banks had their procedures for empanelment of lawyers and providing reservation in the same would be “stretching Article 16”.

TN Govt Claims To Be Champion Of Healthcare Facilities, Expected To Effectively Monitor Paramedical & Clinical Establishments: Madras High Court

Case Title: TN Medical Laboratories Association v Principal Secretary and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 57

The Madras High Court recently commented that when the State of Tamil Nadu claims to be a champion in the healthcare facilities in the country, it is expected to implement the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 scrupulously and monitor and control the clinical establishments in the country.

Justice SM Subramaniam added that health being an integral part of Article 21 of the Constitution, the State is expected to ensure that quality medical services are provided in the clinical establishments across the state.

Ordinary Public Forced To Approach Court For Getting Their Representations Considered While Govt Officials Prioritise People With Power: Madras HC

Case Title: SR Sathyanarayana Rao v The District Collector and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 58

Lamenting on the situations prevailing the State, the Madras High Court recently observed that ordinary citizens were being forced to approach court for a simple direction to government authorities to consider representations.

Justice P Velmurugan observed that the Government Officials who were expected to serve the ordinary citizens, now prioritised only people who had muscle power, money, or political power, ignoring the ordinary man. The court deprecated this attitude of the government officials.

Unfortunate That Superstitious Beliefs Still Prevail: Madras HC Grants Protection To Remove Stone 'Projected As Idol' At Property Entrance

Case Title: E Shakthi Murugan v District Collector

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 59

While granting relief to a man seeking police protection to remove a stone 'projected as an idol' at the entrance of his home, the Madras High Court lamented that even with the passage of time, the society was not evolving and letting go of the superstitious beliefs.

Justice Anand Venkatesh noted that the stone covered with a green cloth was planted right in front of petitioner's property, an attempt was being made to call it as an idol and on that ground, he was not being allowed to enjoy his property.

Blanket Order To Dissolve National Commission For Scheduled Caste Over An Alleged Wrong Action Not In Community's Interest: Madras HC

Case Title: Madurai Mavatta Devendra Kula Velalar Uravinmurai Sangam v The Secrertary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 60

The Madras High Court recently junked a plea seeking to dissolve the National Commission for Scheduled Caste.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy held that if a person was aggrieved by any action of the Commission, they could challenge the same before the appropriate forum, and a blanket prayer for dissolving the Commission would not be in the interest of the members belonging to the scheduled caste community.

The court was hearing a plea by the Madurai Mavatta Devendra Kula velalar Uravinmurai Sangam seeking directions to the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment to dissolve the commission. It was alleged that the commission was not performing its duties in accordance with Article 338 of the Constitution.

Discount Linked To Subsidy Alone Can Form Part Of “Transaction Value”: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Supreme Paradise Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 61

The Madras High Court has held that a discount linked to the subsidy alone can form part of the “transaction value.”.

The bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that a discount by itself will not qualify as a subsidy. However, a discount offered by a distributor, a supplier, or the manufacturer to the buyer or recipient simplicitor cannot form part of the “transaction value” unless such a discount is offered on account of the subsidy for supplies by a third party.

Madras High Court Quashes Assessment Proceedings Initiated In Violation Of Procedure Prescribed As Per Sec 144B

Case Title: CPF (INDIA) Private Limited Verses Addl. CIT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 62

While holding that the draft assessment order suffers from non-application of mind, the Madras High Court sets aside the proceedings initiated in violation of procedure prescribed as per Section 144B(1)(vii) read with (xiv) and (xvi)(b) of the Income tax Act, 1961.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Mohammed Shaffiq observed that “a duty is cast on the assessing authority in terms of Section 144B(1)(xiv) of the Act to take into account all relevant material and thereafter frame the draft assessment order. The respondent has erred in not complying with the above mandatory requirement inasmuch as the draft assessment order has been made without even examining / taking into account the objections / response of the petitioner made vide letter dated 22.09.2021. Thus, the draft assessment order suffers from non-application of mind to matters that are relevant and on record, thus stands vitiated”. (Para 5)

Date Of E-Filing Final Report To Be Taken As Date Of Filing, Not When Papers Are Made Physically Available At Court: Madras High Court

Case Title: Varun and another v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 63

In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court has made it clear that the date of filing a chargesheet should be taken to be the date on which the e-filing was done and not when the papers were physically made available at court.

Justice Anand Venkatesh was dealing with a plea challenging a written endorsement of a trial court returning an application for statutory bail on the ground that the charge sheet had already been filed. The prosecution had informed the court that the final report was e-filed two days before the application for statutory bail was moved and thus the indefeasible right did not exist.

The court noted that in this digital era, one could not say that the date on which the papers were physically produced before the court would be taken to be the date of filing and such an interpretation would defeat all the efforts taken to digitise the legal proceedings.

ALSO READ: Scope Of Extension Petition And Statutory Bail Petition Different, Should Not Be Taken Up Together By The Special Court: Madras High Court

“Environmental Interest Converted Into Communal Tension”: Madras High Court Refuses To Quash Hate Speech Case Against BJP State Head Annamalai

Case Title: K Annamalai v V Piyush

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 64

The Madras High Court on Thursday refused to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against BJP State Head K Annamalai for his remarks against a Christian Missionary NGO.

While refusing to quash a criminal proceeding initiated based on the above statements, Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that Annamalai had turned a petition filed in the interest of the environment into a vehicle for communal tension and the statements had a communal fervor to it.

The court noted that the psychological impact on a person or a group would also come within the definition of hate speech and thus the courts should not only focus on the prima facie physical harm while dealing with these types of cases. The court added that the posts made on Twitter were permanent data and acted like a ticking bomb waiting to have its desired effect at a point of time. The court added that Annamalai's statements had a prima facie psychological impact on the targeted group.

Non-Production Of Original Tax Invoice From Registered Dealer, Reversal Of ITC By Dept. Doesn't Amount To Double Taxation: Madras High Court

Case Title: M/s.Thillai Agencies Versus State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 65

The Madras High Court has held that when a registered dealer claims any benefit under Section 19 of the TNVAT Act 2006, he has to strictly adhere to the conditions laid down in the said section.

The bench of Justice D. Krishnakumar and Justice R. Vijayakumar has observed that the petitioner has not produced the original tax invoice from a registered dealer, and therefore, he cannot complain that the authorities are attempting to reverse the input tax credit in his favor. In fact, the petitioner has affected the purchase five months after the cancellation of the registration of the selling dealer. Since the registration of the selling dealer had already been cancelled in April 2008, he would not have paid the tax. Therefore, the allegation of the petitioner that the notice issued by the respondent department for reversing the input tax credit would amount to double taxation is not legally sustainable.

S. 43A IT Act | Company Preparing List Of Employees Not Vaccinated Against COVID-19 Is Not Circulating Sensitive Personal Data: Madras High Court

Case Title: Gopal Vittal, Bharti Airtel Ltd v Kamatci Shankar Arumugam

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 66

The Madras High Court has recently observed that a company making a list of employees who have not been vaccinated against Covid-19 is not sharing sensitive personal data and cannot be prosecuted under Section 43 A of the Information Technology Act.

Justice Anand Venkatesh thus set aside a private complaint initiated against a company by its former employee. The court noted that the company was merely taking preventive measures to safeguard itself from COVID-19 attacks.

The court noted that Section 43A was not strictly an offense under the IT Act and was more like a tort. The court noted that the consequence of commission of a tort was payment of damages or compensation and no punishment had been prescribed under the Act. Thus, the court noted that the offence was not one, which could be taken cognizance of by a court.

“Right To Participate In Funeral Ceremony Of Parent/Spouse/Child Part Of Article 25”: Madras HC Allows Undertrial To Attend Father's Funeral

Case Title: S Gurumoorthi v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 67

The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court held a special sitting on Sunday to hear the anticipatory bail plea of an undertrial arrested under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, seeking to attend his father's funeral.

Though the court firmly objected to granting bail or interim bail to the prisoner, the court observed that the Right to attend the funeral was part of Article 25 of the Constitution and thus paved way for the undertrial to attend his father's funeral.

Justice GR Swaminathan observed that Article 25 could be invoked by any person and did not make any distinction between free persons and prisoners. The court also noted that the prisoner, being a Hindu had to discharge certain religious obligations. The judge also added that courts must have due regard in matters of religion. Thus, the court invoked its inherent powers to allow the man to attend the funeral and the 16^th Day ceremony.

Madras High Court Quashes ED's Provisional Attachment Order, Says Neither Notice Given To Party Nor Order Confirmed By Adjudicating Authority

Case Title: Nithesh Chaudhari v The Special Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 68

The Madras High Court has recently set aside a provisional attachment order made by the Deputy Director of ED and confirmed by the adjudicating authority after noting that the provisional attachment was not made per law. The court noted that even on the counter, the Department could not explain how the provisional attachment could be sustained on merits.

The bench of Justice MS Ramesh and Justice Sunder Mohan, however, gave liberty to the authorities to take action under the law if upon further investigation it was found that the sale made was a sham.

Though the court agreed that the petitioners had alternative remedies, the court also noted that since the attachment itself was not proper, the petitioners needn't be relegated to approach the authorities or Special Court. the court, thus set aside the provisional attachment order with respect to the petitioners' property.

NIA Act | Restriction On Filing Appeals After 90 Days Despite Showing Sufficient Cause For Delay Against Fundamental Right: Madras High Court

Case Title: Buhari @ Kichan Buhari v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 69

The Madras High Court recently held that the word “Shall” used in Section 21(5) of the National Investigation Agency Act be read as “May” in appeals challenging the judgments of conviction and appeals challenging rejection of bail.

Justice MS Ramesh and Justice Sunder Mohan observed that the right of appeal against conviction and the appeal against rejection of bail is a fundamental right and a procedural law could not extinguish a fundamental right.

The court noted that when a provision in a procedural law had the effect of extinguishing a fundamental right, it could be read down by the courts. The court added that if a person, having sufficient cause, was denied his right of appeal, it would be denying his fundamental right.

Madras High Court Refuses To Stay Conviction Of Former TN DGP Rajesh Das In Sexual Harassment Case

Case Title: Rajesh Das v State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 70

The Madras High Court has refused to stay the conviction of former Tamil Nadu DGP Rajesh Das in a sexual harassment case.

In June 2023, the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court in Villupuram had convicted Das for sexually harassing a woman Superintendent of Police while on duty in 2021 and sentenced him to three-year imprisonment with a fine. This order was confirmed by the Principal Sessions Court, Villupuram on 12^th February 2023.

When Das pleaded for staying this sentence, Justice Nirmal Kumar said that he could not stay the conviction in a criminal revision and observed that such a prayer could be heard only in an appeal against the conviction.

Madras High Court Quashes FIR Against Journalist Abhijit Majumder After He Redacts Derogatory Remarks On Periyar

Case Title: Abhijit Majumder v Inspector of Police and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 71

The Madras High Court on Tuesday quashed an FIR registered against Journalist Abhijit Majumder. The FIR was lodged by the Tamil Nadu police over derogatory remarks made on Periyar in an opinion piece written by Majumder criticizing Tamil Nadu Youth Development Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin's Sanatana Dharma remark.

Justice Anand Venkatesh noted that the journalist had redacted the controversial remarks made against Periyar and had republished the new article. The court noted that the de facto complainant had also accepted Majumder's undertaking and no useful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending.

Madras High Court Quashes Revision Order Passed Under TNGST Act Against Renault Nissan For Travelling Beyond The Scope Of Revision Proceedings

Case Title: Tvl. Renault Nissan Automotive India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner (ST) (FAC)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 72

The Madras High Court has quashed the revision order passed under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act (TNGST Act) against Renault Nissan for travelling beyond the scope of revision proceedings.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has quashed the revision order and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The respondent department was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, to the petitioner and thereafter issue a speaking order. The exercise shall be completed within a maximum period of two months.

'Read Schemes Harmoniously': Madras HC Directs MHA To Give Pension To 94-Yr-Old Ex-Army Personnel Who Was Incarcerated In Rangoon Jail In 1945

Case Title: The Under Secretary to Govt v RK Venkatachalam and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 73

While observing that the schemes in the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Yojana have to be read harmoniously, the Madras High Court recently directed the Union Government to provide pension to a nonagenarian former member of the Indian National Army who was incarcerated in Rangoon (Myanmar) back in 1945.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy noted that in cases where the persons belonging to the Indian National Army were incarcerated in a foreign country, it would be difficult to strictly adhere to the criterion provided in the scheme and in such cases, the scheme had to be read harmoniously.

The court noted that while mainland prisoners could produce certificate from the jail authorities to prove their claims, the members of the INA, who were incarcerated in other countries could not produce such certificates. The court also noted that if insistence was made regarding the certificate of co-prisoners, it would become an eligibility instead of proof.

Madras High Court Grants Bail To Men Booked Under SC/ST Act On Undertaking To Pledge Allegiance To Constitution Against Untouchability

Case Title: Siva and Others v State and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 74

The Madras High Court recently granted bail to three men who were accused under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, after they undertook to file affidavits pledging allegiance to the Constitution stating that they would not practice social discrimination or untouchability.

Noting that the investigation was in the penultimate stage and the charge sheet was also to be filed shortly, the court was inclined to grant bail upon the filing of the undertaking.

Madras High Court Refuses To Stall Formula 4 Night Racing, Asks State To Conduct Race With Highest Degree Of Public Safety

Case Title: Dr. Shri Harish v Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 75

The Madras High Court on Monday refused to stall the Formula 4 night street racing scheduled to be held in Chennai. Though the race was initially proposed to be held in early December 2023, it was later postponed following the Michaung Cyclone.

The bench of Justice R Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq have now dismissed a batch of pleas challenging the conduct of the race. The court noted that the State had decided to conduct the race as part of its policy decision to promote sports and had already spent huge amounts making enormous efforts for the race. The court was thus not inclined to stall the race and prevent the state from implementing its policy decision.

The court thus permitted the race to be conducted on the dates to be fixed by the State in consultation with the stakeholders. The court also directed that the race be conducted with highest regard for public safety and asked the organisers to install necessary silencing equipment for noise control and to provide necessary protective gear to the public viewers.

S. 2(1)(ja) Patents Act | Person Skilled In 'Art' Is Someone Whose Skill Is Greater Than The Average Person: Madras High Court

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 76

While elaborately discussing who would be a “person skilled in the art” under the Patents Act, the Madras High Court recently observed that a person skilled in the art is someone who has a skill level good/greater than the average person.

Further, the court noted that the educational/academic or vocational qualifications of the person would depend on the art. The court added that work experience would be a requirement as an ordinary person with requisite educational qualification but no work experience would not be a skilled person. The court also remarked that such a person should be able to use the tools of the trade.

With respect to identifying the person skilled in the art, the court observed that the person could be readily identified from the field of invention. The court further added that this person could be an individual or a group of persons with the requisite skills.

Demanding To Make Tamil Official Language Of Court Not Illegal: Madras High Court Allows Lawyer To Go On Indefinite Fast

Case Title: G Bhagavath Singh v The Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 77

The Madras High Court recently allowed a lawyer to go on a hunger strike demanding to make Tamil an official language of the High Court. The court thus allowed the lawyer to conduct the indefinite fasting near Rajarathinam, stadium from February 28^th 2024.

Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that the lawyer had only intended to express himself strongly and there was nothing illegal in the objective.

The court also made it clear that of any leader wanted to extend support to the fasting and speak by arranging a meeting near the venue of fasting, prior intimation should be given to the jurisdictional police and permission be taken.

Madras High Court Refuses To Order Action Against Irrigation Officer Who Asked Employees To Perform Special Poojas In Temples For Inducing Rain

Case Title: N Ilango v The Chief Secretary

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 78

The Madras High Court has recently dismissed a plea seeking action against the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Organisation who had issued a circular asking his subordinates to perform special poojas in important temples for getting rain.

Referring to a Government Order, the bench of Justice D Krishnakumar and Justice R Vijayakumar noted that the GO had not prohibited any authority to ask his subordinates to conduct pooja. The court further noted that what the GOs had prohibited was the practice of worship in the office premises.

Kalakshetra Sexual Harassment Case: Madras High Court Closes Plea By Students For Formulation Of Safety Policies

Case Title: XYZ v Kalakshetra Foundation and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 79

The Madras High Court has disposed of a plea filed by a group of students from Rukmini Devi College of Fine Arts, functioning under the Kalakshetra Foundation. The students had approached the court for the formulation of proper safety policies and redressal mechanisms in the college.

Justice Anita Sumanth noted that there was no necessity to issue directions as the college had finalized the Gender Neutral Policy for Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal of Sexual Harassment Complaints. The court also noted that the Internal Complaints Committee was also re-constituted and thus the reliefs sought had been remedied.

The court, however, also added that the institution's failure to address the allegations put forward by the students was a “blight on Kalakshetra”. The court added that the stakeholders in the education system were expected to adhere to the expectations that were demanded.

Madras High Court Asks District Collector To Handover Ancient Temple To Archaeology Department After It Identifies Sculptures, Statues Etc

Case Title: C Rasu v The Principal Secretary and Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 80

The Madras High Court has recently asked the Namakkal District Collector to handover required extent of land of the Sri Kottaianna Swamy Temple to the Archaeology Department for conducting research. The department had, on inspection found important archaeological remains in the temple premises.

Justice SM Subramaniam asked the authorities to initiate land acquisition proceedings and complete the same within a period of 6 months to avoid further damage to the site area and the sculptures, culverts, statutes etc.

Chennai Metro Rail Responsible For TDS Deduction And Not Work-Contractors: Madras High Court

Case Title: Tvl.Transtonelstory Afcons Versus The Assistant Commissioner (CT)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 81

The Madras High Court has held that Chennai Metro Rail Ltd. (CMRL) is responsible for TDS deduction and not work contractors.

The bench of Justice C. Saravanan has observed that if CMRL had failed to deduct the amounts under Section 13(1) of the TNVAT Act, 2006, machinery under Section 13(8) of the TNVAT Act, 2006, is to be directed only against CMRL. Therefore, to that extent, the impugned notices are without jurisdiction. The 2% demand proposed in the notices is to be directed only against CMRL and not on the petitioner, the work contractor.

The court noted that Section 13(1) of the TNVAT Act, 2006, contemplates deduction of tax by the person responsible (namely the employer) for paying any amount to a dealer whose service is engaged for executing a works contract for civil contract work and/or civil maintenance works contract for the former.

NDPS Act | 'Conscious Possession' Along With Physical Possession Essential Element To Constitute Offence: Madras High Court

Case Title: Dharma v Inspector of Police

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 82

The Madras High Court recently observed that conscious possession along with actual physical possession was a necessary element for constituting an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

Justice Vivek Kumar Singh of the Madurai bench observed that like actus reus and mens rea, which were essential elements in criminal law, in the NDPS Act, the physical, as well as the mental possession of drugs, were essential elements.

The court added that offences involving drug peddling affected the financial security of the nation and contributed to anti-national activities as it provided funds to terrorist organisations. Thus, the court highlighted that a balance had to be struck to make sure that the criminals involved in grave offences do not go unpunished and at the same time an innocent is protected from an adverse interpretation of the law. In the court's opinion, the rule of conscious possession provided this balance.

Public Confidence Will Be Shaken If Ministers And MLAs Facing Corruption Case Short-Circuit Criminal Trial: Madras High Court

Case Title: The State v I Periyasamy

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 83

While setting aside the discharge of Tamil Nadu Rural Development Minister I Periyasamy in a corruption case, the Madras High Court on Monday observed that the constitutional courts were duty bound to ensure that the legitimacy of the administration of justice is not eroded by allowing a minister or MLA to short circuit the trial in corruption cases against them.

Justice Anand Venkatesh also observed that the trial court order discharging Periyasamy was manifestly illegal and that the trial judge had committed grave procedural impropriety which necessitated the court's intervention. The court added that once the trial had commenced, the discharge petition filed by Periyasamy was not maintainable and the trial court had committed an error by entertaining it and allowing it.

38 One-Stop Centres For Women Affected By Violence Will Be Made Functional Soon: Centre Informs Madras High Court

Case Title: Krishapriya Foundation v The Union of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 84

The Madras High Court was recently informed that the Central Government has approved 38 One Stop Centres in the State of Tamil Nadu of which only eight One Stop Centres were pending construction. One Stop Centres (OSC) are intended to support women affected by violence, in private and public spaces, within the family, community and at the workplace.

The bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a plea seeking to draw up a scheme for establishing counselling centres in each police station in the state of Tamil Nadu.

Madras High Court Directs UIDAI To Provide Aadhaar Details Of Murder-Accused PFI Member, Says Details Necessary For NIA's Probe

Case Title: Union of India v The Deputy Director, UIDAI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 85

The Madras High Court has recently directed the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) to provide Aadhar details of some PFI members who have been accused of murdering a man and striking terror.

Justice Anand Venkatesh observed that the National Investigation Agency could proceed with the investigation only after obtaining the details and thus directed UIDAI to furnish the details sought by the agency.

DGP Has No Power To Order Further Investigation That Too By Transferring Probe From One Agency To Another: Madras High Court

Case Title: S Lakshmipathy v The State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 86

The Madras High Court recently set aside an order of the Director General of Police transferring the investigation in a case from the state police to the Crime Branch of CID. The court held that the DGP had no powers to order for fresh investigation by transferring the trial to another agency and that the order was legally not sustainable.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan observed that only a court could order for fresh investigation or re-investigation and by filing a new FIR in the guise of conducting further investigation, the DGP and the CB-CID had played with the court. The court added that what had prompted the DGP to suo motu order transfer of investigation was a “million dollaw question”.

Madras High Court Denies Bail To Former Minister Senthil Balaji In Money Laundering Case, Directs Trial Be Completed In 3 Months

Case Title: V Senthil Balaji v Deputy Director

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 87

The Madras High Court has dismissed the bail plea of MLA and former Minister Senthil Balaji. Balaji was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in June last year in a cash-for-jobs money laundering case.

Justice Anand Venkatesh on Wednesday observed that there were no merits in the bail plea filed by Balaji. However, considering that Balaji had been incarcerated for more than 8 months, the court directed the Special court to complete the trial in the case within 3 months.

ALSO READ: Under PMLA, Jail Is The Rule And Bail Is The Exception: Madras High Court In Senthil Balaji's Plea

Marital Relationship Not Worth Saving When It Has Become Worthless & Deadwood, Both Parties Engaged In Abuse & Cruelty: Madras High Court

Case Title: ABC v XYZ

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 88

The Madras High Court has recently observed that when husband and wife were engaged in a war of words, abuse and vulgar criticism of family members, there was no point in saving such a marital relationship as the marital tie would have become worthless and deadwood.

Justice G Jayachandran and Justice C Kumarappan were hearing a challenge against an order from the Family Court refusing to dissolve the marriage between the parties. The court, after going through the exchanges between the parties, which were bordering vulgarity and obscenity, noted that the marriage was bound to be dissolved. The court observed that the cruelty committed by the parties against each other had injured the marital bond.

State Cannot Question Minority Institution's Discretion To Run School With 2 Students, But Has Authority To Decline Grant: Madras High Court

Case Title: The Secretary to Government and Others v Regina

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 89

The Madras High Court recently observed that though neither the Court nor the State have any authority to question the discretion of a minority school to run with just two students, the State does have the authority and right to decline public grant to such school.

The bench of Justice G Jayachandran and Justice C Kumarappan added that an institution, just because of its minority status could not manage their affairs contrary to the instructions of the Government.

Madras High Court Directs State To Appoint Nodal Officers To Ensure Mortal Remains Of Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Convict Are Flown To Sri Lanka

Case Title: Suthendraraja T @ Santhan v The Secretary and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 90

The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Government to appoint senior IAS and IPS officers to ensure that the mortal remains of T Suthenthiraraj alias Santhan, one of the convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi Assassination case is taken to Sri Lanka.

When the matter was taken up previously, the Government had informed the court that the Deputy High Commissioner for Sri Lanka had issued a temporary travel document allowing Santhan to go to Sri Lanka.

On Thursday, the bench of Justice R Subramaniam and Justice K Kumaresh Babu wondered why Santhan was not permitted to go to Sri Lanka despite the exit permit. The court also called for Santhan's medical reports to determine his medical conditions.

The court directed the state to expediate the process and asked the state to coordinate with the High Commission and expedite the process.