Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 2 to December 8, 2024

NOMINAL INDEX

Chandru and Others v. State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 465

R Thamaraiselvan v. Government of India, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 466

Sathish and Another v Food Safety Officer, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 467

Sri Venkateshwaraa Medical College Hospital and Research Centre v The National Medical Commission, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 468

Mohamed Asaruthin v State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 469

T. H. Rajmohan v The Secretary to the Government and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 470

Aathimoolam v State and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 471

C Pakkir Maideen and Others v The Principal Secretary To Government and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 472

VR Dakshin Private Limited Verus SCM Silks Private Limited, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 473

P.Rajkumar v The State, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 474

Deepu and Others v State and Others, 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 475

REPORT

Madras High Court Grants Bail To 4 Students Involved In Clashes That Resulted In Death Of A Student, Asks Them To Assist In Trauma Ward

Case Title: Chandru and Others v. State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 465

The Madras High Court has granted bail to four students who were allegedly involved in group rivalry clashes that resulted in the death of a student.

Justice AD Jagadish Chandira ordered the students to be released on bail after executing a bond for Rs 15,000 with two sureties, one of whom should be the father or mother of the student. The court also asked all four students to assist in the Trauma ward of Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital & the Government Kilpauk Medical College Hospital and to prepare a writeup of their experience.

“Caused Damage To Parties”: Madras High Court Imposes Cost On Former MP For Filing Plea Against Mining Without Proper Research

Case Title: R Thamaraiselvan v. Government of India

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 466

The Madras High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by former DMK MP challenging the government notification inviting tenders for quarry lease.

While doing so, the bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy also imposed a cost of Rs 4 Lakh (Rs 1 Lakh for each petition) for filing the petition without proper research. The court directed the cost to be donated to the Little Heart Training Centre for Intellectual Disabled Boys in Dharmapuri District.

Magistrates Must Ensure That Accused Get Sufficient Legal Advice Before Pleading Guilty: Madras High Court

Case Title: Sathish and Another v Food Safety Officer

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 467

The Madras High Court recently allowed two men to contest their case before the trial court even after making a submission admitting their guilt.

Justice Anand Venkatesh made the order after noting that the men had admitted their guilt before the trial court without knowing the consequences. The court thus observed that the Magistrate must ensure that the accused persons have sufficient legal advice before pleading guilty and it was not necessary for the magistrate to immediately act upon the pleading of guilt especially when the punishment provided was quite serious.

Linguistic Minority Medical Colleges Bound By NMC's 50% PG-Seat Sharing Rule, Ensures Implementation Of Reservation Policies: Madras HC

Case Title: Sri Venkateshwaraa Medical College Hospital and Research Centre v The National Medical Commission

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 468

The Madras High Court has recently made it clear that linguistic minority self financing medical colleges are bound by the National Medical Council's 50% seat sharing rule. As per the Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations 2000, medical colleges were to surrender 50% of the seats in PG Medical Courses to the State/Union Territory.

Justice Vivek Kumar Singh observed that only when the States and Union Territories had control over some seats, they could implement the reservation policies in its full effect. Thus, the court highlighted that seat sharing was unavoidable and was a sine-qua -non for the implementation of reservation policy.

No Necessity To Call Upon Accused To File Counter In Extension Application, Presence Only Needed To Consider Objections: Madras HC

Case Title: Mohamed Asaruthin v State of Tamil Nadu

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 469

The Madras High Court recently observed that when an application for extension was filed by the prosecution, the presence of the accused was ensured only to inform him about the application and consider the objections, if any. The court added that there was no necessity for the court to call upon the counter of the accused.

Justice Sunder Mohan emphasized that while considering the application for extension, the court was only required to consider whether the report of the prosecutor satisfied the twin conditions – that there was appreciable progress in the investigation and that there are compelling reasons to justify further detention pending investigation.

“Either Lied In Court Or Has Been Set Up”: Madras High Court Imposes ₹20 Lakh Cost On Litigant, Restrains Him From Filing PILs For 1 Year

Case Title: T. H. Rajmohan v The Secretary to the Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 470

The Madras High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation filed by a 62-year-old man and imposed a cost of Rs. 20 Lakh on him. The court also restrained the PIL petitioner from filing any PILs in the court without prior permission for 1 year.

The bench of Chief Justice KR Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy ordered so after noting that the petition was not Bonafide and that the petitioner had willingly failed to disclose material information.

Headmaster Guardian Of Entire School, Must Immediately Intimate Authorities Of Incidents Under POCSO Act: Madras HC Refuses To Quash Proceedings

Case Title: Aathimoolam v State and Another

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 471

While refusing to set aside the criminal proceedings initiated against a school headmaster, the Madras High Court emphasised that the Headmaster was the guardian of the entire school and was expected to report any instances under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

Justice P Velmurugan observed as under,

“The Head Master is the guardian of the entire school. If any incident covered under POCSO Act has taken place, the same has to be immediately intimated either to the District Child Protection Officer or to the Police concerned,” the court said.

Registration Of Adoption Deed 'Futile', Has No Legal Sanctity And Does Not Give Any Right To Parties Irrespective Of Religion: Madras HC

Case Title: C Pakkir Maideen and Others v The Principal Secretary To Government and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 472

The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court has made it clear that the registration of an adoption deed is a futile exercise as it does not confer any rights on the parties to adoption and does not have any legal sanctity. The court thus observed that the registration of adoption deed could not be asked as a matter of right before the registering authority.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan thus directed the Inspector General (IG) of Registration to issue necessary circulars to all registrars asking them to refrain from registering any deed of adoption, irrespective of their religion.

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court

Case Title: VR Dakshin Private Limited Verus SCM Silks Private Limited

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 473

The Madras High Court bench of of Chief justice Mr. K.R.Shriram and Justice Senthil Kumar Ramamoorthy has held that the ineligibility of the Arbitrator cannot be challenged for the first time under section 34 of the Arbitration Act when there were enough opportunities to challenge the same in the earlier proceedings.

It also noted that section 4 of the Act provides that when a party knows that any requirement under the arbitration agreement has not been complied with and yet proceeds with the arbitration without stating his objection to such non-compliance, such party shall be deemed to have waived his right to so object.

Informal Opinion Rendered By Expert Not Binding On Court: Madras High Court Grants Bail To Man Found In Possession Of Magic Mushrooms

Case Title: P.Rajkumar v The State

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 474

The Madras High Court recently held that while considering bail applications, an informal opinion rendered by an expert was not binding on the court. It reiterated that while exercising bail jurisdiction, the court had to consider the language adopted in the enactment and only had to be prima facie satisfied whether there was a reasonable chance of conviction.

Justice Anand Venkatesh made the observations while discussing a recent judgment rendered by Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy in which the latter had an informal interaction with an expert and concluded that every cell of a magic mushroom contained chemicals and that entire quantity had to be measured to determine the commercial quantity.

The court reiterated that while considering the bail application, the court must prima facie satisfy itself on whether there was a reasonable chance for the accused to be held guilty. The court added that at the stage of bail, the court was not expected to meticulously examine the materials collected at the stage of investigation. The court added that while considering bail, the court had to look into the language adopted in the enactment.

Kodanad Heist-Murder Case | Madras High Court Allows Accused To Examine Former CM Edappadi Palaniswami, VK Sasikala As Witnesses

Case Title: Deepu and Others v State and Others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 475

The Madras High Court has allowed a criminal revision petition filed by three accused in the Kodanadu heist and murder case allowing them to summon and examine former Tamil Nadu CM Edappadi Palaniswami and VK Sasikala among others as witnesses.

Justice P Velmurugan noted that the application of the accused to examine the witnesses was not without reason and the same would not cause any delay as further investigation had been ordered in the case. The court thus directed the Sessions Judge to comlete the trial by giving opportunity to both the parties and give an opportunity to the accused to examine the 8 witnesses as sought for.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

Madras High Court Issues Notice On Plea To Prevent Online Review Of New Movies For First 3 Days After Release

Case Title: Tamil Film Active Producers Association (TFAPA) v Union of India and Others

Case No: WP 36716 of 2024

The Madras High Court has ordered notice on a plea to prevent online review of movies within the first three days of release.

Though Justice S Sounther orally remarked that criticism formed part of the freedom of speech and expression which could not be curtailed, the court decided to issue notice to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Information Technology and Digital Services in State of Tamil Nadu, Commissioner of Police and Youtube.

In its plea, the association submitted that with the rise of social media platforms and evolution of the cinema industry, there has been a parallel growth in the field of criticism where movie reviewers are playing a huge part in shaping the audience perception, influencing the industry trends and fostering meaningful discussions on cinema. While the association admitted that the landscape of film criticism has become democratized, it was submitted that these criticisms have brought in unimaginable challenges.

Student Moves Madras High Court Challenging CBFC Certificate To Amaran Movie, Claims Compensation For Using His Phone Number

Case Title: VV Vaageesan v The Secretary to Government and Others

Case No: WP 37253 of 2024

An engineering student has approached the Madras High Court challenging the Censor Certificate issued to the Tamil Movie “Amaran” starring Sivakarthikeyan and Sai Pallavi. The student has also sought damages claiming that his personal phone number had been used in the movie leading to him getting continuous calls.

When the matter was taken up by Justice S Sounthar on Friday, Senior Advocate Aravind Pandian, appearing for Raaj Kamal Films, the producer of the movie, informed the court that the particular scene had been edited and the mobile number had been blurred. Pandian also informed the court that a fresh certificate had also been obtained after the modifications and contended that the prayer had become infructuous.

While the judge sympathised with the student, he wondered how the court could order compensation in the writ petition. The court also suggested that the petitioner could work out his remedies before the civil court for the damages caused to him.

Sand Mining Money Laundering Case | Madras High Court Closes Plea Challenging ED's Notice To District Collectors

Case Title: State of Tamil Nadu v Directorate of Enforcement

Case No: WP 33459 of 2023

The Madras High Court has closed the petitions filed by the State of Tamil Nadu challenging the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate to the District Collectors in connection with the probe of sand mining money laundering case.

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice M Jothiraman closed the plea after the Advocate General informed the court that the plea had become infructuous since the collectors had already appeared before the investigation agency following the orders of the Supreme Court.

Music Academy Appeals To Madras High Court DB Against Order Restraining It From Giving Award In MS Subbalakshmi's Name

Case Title: The Music Academy v V Shrinivas and Others

Case No: OSA 235 of 2024

The Music Academy has approached the Madras High Court challenging a single judge's order restraining it from conferring awards in the name of Late Carnatic singer MS Subbalakshmi.

A division bench of Justice SS Sundar and Justice P Dhanabal is expected to hear the appeal on December 9 (Monday).

On November 19, Justice G Jayachandran had in an interim order restrained the Music Academy and The Hindu from conferring the “Sangita Kalanidhi M.S.Subbulakshmi Award” to TM Krishna or any other person.