Sivakumar @ Siva v. The State Rep By Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.02.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN Crl.O.P.No.1521 of 2023 1.Sivakumar 2.Gowrishankar ... Petitioner Vs.
State Inspector of Police E3 - Teynampet Police Station, Chennai.
(Cr.No.213 o 2022) 2.Kalaiselvi .. Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records in Cr.No.213 of 2022 on the file of the E3 Teynampet Police Station,Chennai and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Senthilvel For Respondents : Mr.S.Santhosh, Govt. Adv. (crl.side) for R1. M/s.P.Krishnamoorthy for R2.
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition is filed to call for the records in Cr.No.213 of 2022 on the file of the E3 Teynampet Police Station,Chennai/ 1st respondent for the offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(i) of IPC and to quash the same.
2. When the matter is taken up today, the petitioners, the second 1/5
respondent/defacto complainant and the victim filed a joint memorandum of compromise signed by all the parties along with their respective counsel on record. As per the joint memorandum of compromise, it is stated that the victim, defacto complainant and the petitioners have resolved their dispute among themselves with the help of their friends and neighbours and the second respondent/defacto complainant and the victim have stated no objection for quashing the complaint.
3. The petitioner and the second respondent/defacto complainant and the victim were present in person before this Court and they were identified by one M/s.V.Veerammal - SI attached to E3 Police Station, Teynampet, Chennai. This Court also enquired both the parties and satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. The second respondent and her husband/victim answered this Court, that in order to maintain a healthy and peaceful life, they did not want to prosecute the case against the petitioners and they have stated no objection for quashing the proceedings in Cr.No.213 of 2022 on the file of the Inspector of Police, E3 Terynampet Police Station, Chennai. 2/5
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the first respondent submitted that it is a dispute with regard to wordy quarrel between the parties who are residing in the same locality. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant/second respondent a case was registered in Cr.No.213 of 2022 for the offence under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(i) IPC and the investigation is pending. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromised the dispute amicably among themselves.
5. Considering the fact that the second respondent/defacto complainant and her husband/victim do not want to prosecute the case as against the petitioners and they have stated no objection for quashment of proceedings, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceeding in Cr.No.213 of 2022.
6. In the light of the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath) reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641, this Court in exercise of its 3/5
jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashes the proceedings in Cr.No.213 of 2022.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Cr.No.213 of 2022 pending, on the file of the Inspector of Police, E3 Teynampet Police Station, Chennai is quashed and the joint memorandum of compromise shall form part and parcel of this order. 13.02.2023 tsh Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking Order To
1. Inspector of Police E3 Teynampet Police Station, Chennai.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J, tsh 4/5
13.02.2023.
5/5