Diwakar v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 30.06.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.O.P.No.12301 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.No.6351 of 2016 1.Diwakar 2.Muthu Selvam 3.Vel Murugan ... Petitioners/Accused Vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, H-8, R.K.Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

... 1st Respondent/Defacto Complainant.

2.S.Murugan ... 2nd Respondents / Complainant.

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No.518 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent herein and quash the FIR against the petitioners.

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Saranraj For R1 : Mr.C.Emalias, APP For R2 : Mr.T.M.Rajeswaran

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.518 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners; learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent; learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and perused the materials placed on record.

3. On a complaint lodged by Murugan/2nd respondent herein, the 1st respondent police registered a case in Crime No.581 of 2016 on 12.04.2016 under Sections 341, 294[b], 323 and 506[i] IPC against the petitioners/accused herein, challenging which, the accused are before this Court for quashing the FIR in Crime No.581 of 2016, on the ground that the parties have arrived at a compromise.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. Today, S.Murugan/2nd respondent herein is present before this Court and he has been identified by his counsel Mr.T.N.Rajeshwaran, Enrollment No.2929/08. He has filed an affidavit, wherein, he has stated as follows: "3. I respectfully submit that the case of the prosecution on 11.04.2016 at about 10.30 PM due to wordy quarrel entered between 1st petitioner and me. Further submit that the 2nd and 3rd petitioners are not in the scene of occurrence place. After that the above incident I am admitted in hospital. Further submit that the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant was friends and both of them residing at same locality. Due to some misunderstanding, the 1st petitioner had beaten the de facto complainant. Now the 1st petitioner and de facto complainant was compromised and realise to amicably settle the matter.

4. I respectfully submit that I went to the 1st respondent police and gave withdraw letter to the 1st respondent but they did not considered my withdrawal letter."

5. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the FIR in Crime No.518 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent is hereby quashed against all the accused. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

gya -s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-VI) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To

1. The Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai 1.

2.The Inspector of Police, H-8, R.K.Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

tm(co) prk14/7 Crl.O.P.No.12301 of 2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/