Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16615 (7.63 seconds)

Selina @ Pavithra vs State Rep. By Its on 7 June, 2024

6. In view of the above, docket order passed in Spl.S.C.No.15 of 2020 dated 11.03.2024 by the learned Special Court for trial under SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Srivilliputhur is set aside. The appellants are directed to appear before the Court below on each and every hearing dates without fail and the learned trial Judge is directed to complete the trial process as expeditiously as possible. If any violation is noticed in future, the learned trial Judge to take action against the appellant as per the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala reported in 2005 AIR SCW 5560. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Umadurai vs The Inspector Of Police on 3 November, 2022

If the proceedings are quashed agains the persons who are detained under Act.14 and if they are released from detention and if they are not cooperating with the trial the learned Sessions Judge, shall pass appropriate orders in the light of the reported ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala, reported in [(2005)AIR SCW 5560], by disposing the case within a reasonable period of one or two months.
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S S Kumar - Full Document

Senthil Kumar vs The Director General Of Police on 11 June, 2021

The Superintendent of Police, Thoothukudi, is directed to consider the case for early disposal before the trial Court and through the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sathankulam, who is the Investigation Officer, shall see that the case is disposed off early. If any of the Accused fail to co- operate the Investigation Officer shall approach the Court concerned either the Sessions Court or the committal Court in the light of the reported ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560] as though bail was granted by the Court concerned – either the Sessions Court or the Committal Court and shall cancel the bail granted to the Accused concerned.
Madras High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - S S Kumar - Full Document

Hakkem vs The Inspector Of Police on 30 January, 2024

4.In cases before this Court, it is found that the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala reported in (2005) AIR SCW 5560 had not been taken note of either by the Members of the Bar, who appear for the accused and seek bail or by the accused themselves or by the Police Officials. For the Investigating Officer, the said ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court had indicated that if the accused, who was granted bail, does not comply with the conditions in either cooperating with the investigation or after investigation in not cooperating with the trial Court, the Investigating Officer or the Police Officer concerned shall approach the nearest Judicial Magistrate, who has jurisdiction over the Police Station concerned and seek cancellation of bail, as though the bail was granted by the learned Judicial Magistrate. In spite of giving such discretion to the Police Officer concerned, they had not done so. 3/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - S S Kumar - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next