{"id":162009,"date":"2003-01-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-01-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003"},"modified":"2016-06-30T15:29:48","modified_gmt":"2016-06-30T09:59:48","slug":"k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003","title":{"rendered":"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\n\nDATED: 21\/01\/2003\n\n\nCORAM\n\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KANAGARAJ\n\n\nCRL.O.P.NO.392 OF 2003\nAND CRL.OP.NOS. 410 and 414 OF 2003\n\n\n1.K.L.Krishnamurthy .. Petitioner in all the above O.Ps.\n\n\n2.K.L.Subramanian       ..      Petitioner in all the above O.Ps.\n\n\n3.K.K.Ramesh Babu       ..      Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No. 414\/03\n\n\n-Vs-\n\n\nState rep. by\nThe Inspector of Police\nE.O.W. II\nSivagangai.             ..      Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.392\/03\n\n\nState rep. by\nThe Inspector of Police\nE.O.W. II\nDindigul.                       ..      Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.410\/03\n\n\nState rep. by\nThe Inspector of Police\nE.O.W. II\nMadurai.                        ..      Respondent in Crl.O.P.NO.414\/03\n\n\n        Petitions filed under section 482  Cr.P.C.    praying  for  as  stated\nbelow.\n\n\nFor petitioners        :       Mr.  D.Murthy\n\n\nFor respondents        :       Mr.  O.Srinath, G.A.\n\n\n:O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n<p>                For  easy  reference  and for the sake of convenience Criminal<br \/>\nOriginal Petition Nos.  392, 410 and 414 of 2003 are herein after referred  to<br \/>\nas the first, second and the third Criminal Original Petition respectively.\n<\/p>\n<p>                From  out  of all the above three Criminal Original Petitions,<br \/>\nthe first and second Criminal Original petition above have been filed  by  the<br \/>\nbrothers, namely, K.L.Krishnamurthy and K.L.Subramanian and the third Criminal<br \/>\noriginal  petition  is  filed  besides these two persons by another K.K.Ramesh<br \/>\nBabu, who is the son of the first petitioner in the  other  Criminal  Original<br \/>\nPetitions  and the respondent in the first Criminal Original petition is State<br \/>\nrep.  by The Inspector of Police, E.O.W.II, Sivagangai, the respondent in  the<br \/>\nsecond Criminal  Original  petition is State rep.  by The Inspector of Police,<br \/>\nE.O.W.II, Dindigul and the respondent in the third Criminal Original  petition<br \/>\nis State rep.  by The Inspector of Police, E.O.W.II, Madurai.\n<\/p>\n<p>                2.      These  Criminal  Original  Petitions  have  been filed<br \/>\ngenerally  alleging  that  on  the  complaints  lodged  by  one  T.S.Kuppusamy<br \/>\nrespectively   dated   27-05-2002,   26-05-2002   and   25-05-2002   concerned<br \/>\nrespectively in the above first, second and third Criminal Original  Petition,<br \/>\nthree  cases  have been registered by the respondents, all under Sections 4 06<br \/>\nand 420 of I.P.C.    against  the  petitioners  described  above  as  per  the<br \/>\nrespondents F.I.R.s  in its Crime Nos.  1 of 2002, dated 27-05-2002, Crime No.<br \/>\n4 of 2002, dated 26-05-2002 and Crime No.  5 of 2002 , dated 25-05-2002 and it<br \/>\nis only praying to quash all the above cases registered and investigated  into<br \/>\nby  the  respondents,  the petitioners have come forward to file all the above<br \/>\nCriminal  Original  petitions,  on  grounds  such  as  that  the   complainant<br \/>\nT.S.Kuppusamy, has alleged in the first case above that he had deposited a sum<br \/>\nof Rs.  2,50,000\/- dated 5-8-1996 in the petitioners&#8217; Finance Company, namely,<br \/>\nK.L.   Krishnamurthy  Finance  Company,  as  a Fixed Deposit for a period of 3<br \/>\nyears, promising to pay interest at 24% per annum for the deposit  amount,  in<br \/>\nso  far  as  the second case above is concerned that he had deposited a sum of<br \/>\nRs.  85,000\/- and Rs.1,15,000\/- respectively dated 23-04-1996  and  24-03-1998<br \/>\nin   the  petitioners&#8217;  Finance  Company,  namely,  K.L.Krishnamurthy  Finance<br \/>\nCompany, as a Fixed Deposit for a period of 3 years, promising to pay interest<br \/>\nat 24% per annum for deposit amount and in so far as the third case  above  is<br \/>\nconcerned that he had deposited a sum of Rs.  30,000\/- and Rs.1,25,000\/- dated<br \/>\n16-9-1997  and  20-11-1997  respectively  in the petitioners&#8217; Finance Company,<br \/>\nnamely, K.L.Krishnamurthy Finance Company, as a Fixed Deposit for a period  of<br \/>\n3  years,  promising  to pay interest at 24% per annum for the deposit amount;<br \/>\nthat the accused therein executed the promissory  notes  in  his  favour,  but<br \/>\nevaded  the issuance of deposit receipts under some pretext or the other; that<br \/>\non the complaints lodged by the complainant, the respondents  have  registered<br \/>\nthe cases in the manner aforementioned under its crime numbers for the offence<br \/>\npunishable under  Sections  406 and 420 I.P.C.  and have taken up the same for<br \/>\ninvestigation.  Hence, alleging that the complaint has not been lodged on true<br \/>\nfacts and circumstances, but on motivated, false  and  imaginery  allegations,<br \/>\nthus  giving the colour of criminality for the cases which are civil in nature<br \/>\nand on such grounds, since according to the petitioners the complaints  cannot<br \/>\nbe  maintained before the respondents, particularly under the TNPID Act before<br \/>\nthe Special Court they have come forward to file all the above three petitions<br \/>\npraying for quashing the F.I.Rs in the respective Criminal Original  petitions<br \/>\nabove.\n<\/p>\n<p>                3.      During  arguments  the  learned  counsel  appearing on<br \/>\nbehalf of the petitioners besides analysing the facts and circumstances of the<br \/>\ncase as projected  in  the  Original  Petitions  above  would  also  cite  two<br \/>\njudgments, the first one delivered in T.T.ANTONY VS.  STATE OF KERALA ((2 001)<br \/>\n6 SUPREME  COURT  CASES  181),  wherein, it is held that &#8220;&#8230;  There can be no<br \/>\nsecond F.I.R.  and no fresh  investigation  on  receipt  of  every  subsequent<br \/>\ninformation  in  respect  of  the  same  cognizable offence or same occurrence<br \/>\ngiving rise to one or  more  cognizable  offences.    Only  information  about<br \/>\ncommission  of  a  cognizable  offence which is first entered in station house<br \/>\ndiary by officer in charge of the police station can  be  regarded  as  F.I.R.<br \/>\nunder Section  154.    All  such  subsequent  informations  will be covered by<br \/>\nSection 162&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>                4.      In  the  second  judgment  cited  on  behalf  of   the<br \/>\npetitioners delivered in M\/s.  KUNSTOCOM ELECTRONICS (I) PVT.  LTD., VS.  GILT<br \/>\nPACK  LIMITED  (AIR  2002  SUPREME  COURT 739) it is held that &#8220;the High Court<br \/>\ndisposing of the petition with observation that accused shall  have  right  to<br \/>\nraise  all  grounds at the time of framing of the charge is held not proper on<br \/>\nground that since raising the very same objections at the time of framing  the<br \/>\ncharge  would practically be an empty formality as the trial Court had already<br \/>\ntaken a definite view in the matter&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>                5.      On the part of the learned Government Advocate on  the<br \/>\nCriminal  Side,  he  would  submit that a definite case of breach of trust and<br \/>\ncheating has been made out on the face of the F.I.R.s by  the  complainant  in<br \/>\nall  the three cases registered by the respondents relating to the above three<br \/>\ncriminal Original Petitions  and  the  matters  are  under  investigation  and<br \/>\ntherefore,  no  interference  by  this  Court  need be necessary and since the<br \/>\namounts put in fixed deposit have matured for payment,  the  accused  on  such<br \/>\nmaturity should have paid the amounts as promised, which they failed to do, as<br \/>\na result of which, the complainant has rightly preferred the complaints before<br \/>\nthe  respondents  and  they  are  duty  bound  to entertain the complaints and<br \/>\ninvestigate into and file the charge sheet, in which event, no other  question<br \/>\nmuchless  that  they  are  the  cases  civil in nature would arise and on such<br \/>\narguments, the learned Government Advocate would pray for  dismissing  of  the<br \/>\nCriminal Original Petitions.\n<\/p>\n<p>                6.      In  consideration  of the facts pleaded, having regard<br \/>\nto the materials placed  on  record  and  upon  hearing  the  learned  counsel<br \/>\nappearing on behalf of the petitioners&#8217; and the learned Government Advocate on<br \/>\nthe  Criminal  Side  contra what comes to be known is that in the petitioners&#8217;<br \/>\nFinance Company, the complainant before the respondents, namely  T.S.Kuppusamy<br \/>\nhas  deposited  amounts  as  afore extracted in three fixed deposits for three<br \/>\nyears and on attaining the maturity, after three years  the  petitioners  have<br \/>\nfailed to repay the amounts, with interest at 24% per annum as promised at the<br \/>\ntime of investment and hence, he has come forward to lodge criminal complaints<br \/>\nagainst  the  petitioners  before  the  respondents  for  penal  action and on<br \/>\nintimation of the complaints, the respondents have registered cases  in  their<br \/>\ncrime numbers against the petitioners for the commission of offence punishable<br \/>\nunder Sections  406  and  420  I.P.C.   and it is against registering of these<br \/>\ncases as per their crime Nos.  1, 4 and 5 of 2002, the petitioners  have  come<br \/>\nforward  to  file  the  above Criminal Original Petitions praying to quash the<br \/>\nsame.\n<\/p>\n<p>                7.      There seems to be nothing wrong on  the  part  of  the<br \/>\ncomplainant  in  the  criminal  case  registered  by  the  respondents to have<br \/>\nresorted to lodge the complaints on the failure of the  petitioners  to  repay<br \/>\nthe  sums deposited with them in their Finance Company, which are all admitted<br \/>\nfacts.  But the only plea that is taken on the part of the petitioners is that<br \/>\nthe subject matters are civil  in  nature  and  they  cannot  lie  before  the<br \/>\nrespondents for investigation.\n<\/p>\n<p>                8.      The   learned  counsel  appearing  on  behalf  of  the<br \/>\npetitioners would also cite the above two judgments, the prepositions of which<br \/>\nheld therein are general in nature and they cannot directly become  applicable<br \/>\nto the facts and circumstances of the case in hand.  There does not seem to be<br \/>\nany  ambiguity  or  irregularity  in the registration of the case filed by the<br \/>\nrespondents, particularly for commission of offence by the  petitioners  under<br \/>\nSections 406  and 420 I.P.C.  and hence, this Court does not find any valid or<br \/>\ntangible reason to cause interference into the registration of  the  cases  or<br \/>\nthe  investigation  taken  up  on  the  part  of  the respondents and in these<br \/>\ncircumstances the only course open for this Court is to refrain  from  causing<br \/>\nany  interference into the case registered and investigated into in the manner<br \/>\nstated above and hence, the following judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>                In result,<br \/>\ni.the above Criminal Original Petitions are without merit  and  the  same  are<br \/>\ndismissed;\n<\/p>\n<p>ii.consequently, Crl.M.P.Nos.  171, 174 and 177 of 2003 are also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:  Yes<br \/>\nInternet:  Yes<br \/>\npaa<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.      State rep.  by<br \/>\n        The Inspector of Police<br \/>\n        E.O.W.  II<br \/>\n        Sivagangai.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.      State rep.  by<br \/>\n        The Inspector of Police<br \/>\n        E.O.W.  II<br \/>\n        Dindigul.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.      State rep.  by<br \/>\n        The Inspector of Police<br \/>\n        E.O.W.  II<br \/>\n        Madurai.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.      The Public Prosecutor   High Court<br \/>\n        Madras.\n<\/p>\n<p>((SCO LYRIX 6.1<br \/>\n))<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21\/01\/2003 CORAM THE HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KANAGARAJ CRL.O.P.NO.392 OF 2003 AND CRL.OP.NOS. 410 and 414 OF 2003 1.K.L.Krishnamurthy .. Petitioner in all the above O.Ps. 2.K.L.Subramanian .. Petitioner in all the above O.Ps. 3.K.K.Ramesh [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-162009","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2003-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-30T09:59:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-30T09:59:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003\"},\"wordCount\":1505,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003\",\"name\":\"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-01-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-30T09:59:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-30T09:59:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003","datePublished":"2003-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-30T09:59:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003"},"wordCount":1505,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003","name":"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-01-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-30T09:59:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-l-krishnamurthy-vs-state-rep-by-on-21-january-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.L.Krishnamurthy vs State Rep. By on 21 January, 2003"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/162009","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=162009"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/162009\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=162009"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=162009"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=162009"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}