N.Desinghu v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.02.2020
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P. No.3310 of 2020 1.N.Desinghu
2. P.Madhankumar
3. C.Nagamuthu
4. C.Kanthan
5. M.Ramesh
6. M.Ravi
7. K.Kalaimani
8. Kathavarayan
9. T.Kannappan
10. C.Elumalai
11. D.Lakshmanan
12. Manikandan
13. S.Pandiyan
14. S.Elumalai
15. C.Sathiyaraj
16. S.Magesh
17. P.Vasu
...Petitioners
Vs.
1. State, rep.by The Inspector of Police, G-6, Cheyyur Police Station, Kancheepuram District.
(Crime No.270 of 2012)
2. Karthick
...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records relating to FIR in Crime No.270 of 2012 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.
For Petitioners :Mr.K.Duraisamy, Senior Counsel for Mr.A.Muthumani Duraisamy For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor for R1
: Mr.R.Sunil Kumar for R2
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records and to quash the FIR in Crime No.270 of 2012 for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i) and 307 of IPC IPC pending on the file of first respondent police as against the petitioners.
2. The second respondent, who is the defacto complainant has lodged a complaint against the petitioners and based on the same, the first respondent has registered an FIR in Crime No.270 of 2012 under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i) and 307 of IPC.
3. The case is still in the stage of investigation. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.
4. A joint memo of Compromise, dated 14.02.2020, has been filed before this Court which has been signed by the petitioners and the 2nd respondent and also by their respective counsel. The petitioners and the 2nd respondent also present in person before this Court. This Court also enquired both the parties and satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.
5. Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the case pending. Even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature, in the light of the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2017 9 SCC 641-(Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath), this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashes the Case in Crime No. 2 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent police.
6. This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.270 of 2012 on the file of the first respondent, is hereby quashed and the terms of Memo of Compromise shall form part and parcel of this order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Vv
To
1. The Inspector of Police, G-6, Cheyyur Police Station, Kancheepuram District.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
+1cc to M/s Muthumani Doraisamy, Advocate, Sr.No.12790 +1cc to M/s R.Sunil Kumar, Advocate, Sr.No.13329 Crl.O.P. No.3310 of 2020 BP(CO) GS(10/07/2020)