M.A. RUMUGAM versus KITTU @ KIRSHNAMOORTHY

M.A. RUMUGAM versus KITTU @ KIRSHNAMOORTHY

Allegations in complaint make out a case for proceeding under Section 500 IPC; it is premature at this stage to determine good faith and exceptions under Section 499; burden of proof for exception lies on appellant.

Parties
Appellant: M.A. Rumugam; Respondent: Kittu @ Krishnamoorthy
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order Denying Quashing of Criminal Complaint
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Quashing of Proceedings, Burden of Proof, Sections 499, 500 IPC, Section 482 Cr PC
Criminal Law Defamation Quashing of Proceedings Burden of Proof Sections 499, 500 IPC Section 482 Cr PC

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M.A. Rumugam

Appellant

Kittu @ Krishnamoorthy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order Denying Quashing of Criminal Complaint

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complaint against appellant under Section 500 IPC is liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC
  2. 2 Whether the act alleged falls within the Eighth and Ninth Exceptions to Section 499 IPC

Ratio Decidendi

Allegations in complaint make out a case for proceeding under Section 500 IPC; it is premature at this stage to determine good faith and exceptions under Section 499; burden of proof for exception lies on appellant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; trial to proceed.