Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: February 12 to February 18, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 67 To 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 72

NOMINAL INDEX

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

REPORT

“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.

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

Madras High Court Reserves Order On Suo Motu Revision Against Minister Periyasamy's Discharge, Questions DVAC's Inaction In Obtaining Sanction

The Madras High Court on Tuesday reserved orders on the suo motu revision taken up against the discharge of Tamil Nadu Rural Development Minister I Periyasamy in a corruption case.

The case against Periyamasy was that while serving as the Minister for Housing in the DMK cabinet between 2008 and 2009, he had conspired with other persons to illegally obtain a High Income Group Plot in the Mogappair Eri Scheme of the Tamil Nadu Housing Board.

Justice Anand Venkatesh on Tuesday questioned the DVAC's inaction in obtaining the sanction to prosecute, even after the trial court had discharged the Minister citing improper sanction. The trial court, while discharging Periyasamy had observed that the Speaker was not the proper authority for granting sanction to proceed against the Minister and had noted that the sanction should have been accorded by the Governor as per Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

'Can't Conduct Mini-Trial In Bail Proceedings': ED Opposes Senthil Balaji's Bail Plea In Madras High Court

The Enforcement Directorate on Thursday opposed the bail plea moved by former Tami Nadu Minister MLA Senthil Balaji. Balaji was arrested by the ED in June last year in a cash for jobs money laundering case. During the pendency of the bail plea, Balaji had also resigned from his ministerial post.

The bail plea was heard by Justice Anand Venkatesh. The court had previously taken a strong view against Balaji continuing as a Minister without portfolio in the cabinet and remarked that it did not auger well for the democracy.