- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 4 December 2023
- Bench
- G.Ilangovan
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 23155/2023
Judgment
O R D E R This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned summons of the 3rd respondent vide his proceedings in 185/DCB/KRR/2023, dated 10.08.2023 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 not to interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioners and the 4th respondent.
¶2When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the third respondent has withdrawn the summons issued to the petitioner. So nothing survives for further adjudication.
¶3In view of the above, the matter has become infructuous. This writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
04.12.2023 NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet : Yes/ No PNM To
¶1The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur.
¶2The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur District.
¶3The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. G.ILANGOVAN, J PNM ORDER IN and W.M.P(MD)Nos.19354 and 19356 of 2023 Dated : 04.12.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.12.2023 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN and W.M.P(MD)Nos.19354 and 19356 of 2023 1. P.Senthil Kumar 2. P.Anbarasi 3. Velu 4. D.Ramachandran 5. R.Sudhagar 6. R.Suresh 7. R.Ramesh Kumar ... Petitioners Vs 1. The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur. 2. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur District. 3. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur District. 4. Susenth ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned summons of the 3rd respondent vide his proceedings in 185/DCB/KRR/2023, dated 10.08.2023 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents 1 to 3 not to interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioners and 4th respondent. For Petitioner : Mr. R.Surianarayanan For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthikumar (R1-R3) Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu (R4)
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.