Deva @ Deva Arockiam v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.11.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMALKUMAR Crl.O.P.No.5902 of 2021 Deva @ Deva Arockiam ...

Petitioner

Versus

1.The Inspector of Police, B-6, Mappedu Police Station, Thiruvallur District (Crime No.114 of 2020) ..1st Respondent/Complainant

2. Mr.Sarathkumar . ..

Respondent/Defacto complainant This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to call for the records and quash the FIR in Crime No.114 of 2020 dated 17.03.2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Mappedu Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

For Petitioner :

Mr.K.Elumalai For Respondents :

Mr.R.VinothRaja (R1) Govt.Advocate (Crl.side)

O R D E R

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records and quash the FIR in Crime No.114 of 2020 dated 17.03.2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Mappedu Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

2. The case of the prosecution is that defacto complainant is working a manager in Sri Sai Enterprises Company and on 15.03.2020 at about 10 p.m., the petitioner along with four identified persons dug the ditch to the extent that it cannot be used for general public, in which water supply pipe was broken and the general public was inconvenienced. Thereafter on 17.03.2020, at about 8.00 P.M. the petitioner along with four others waylaid the defacto complainant and threatened him with dire consequences, due to which a complaint was given by the defacto complainant, based on which a case came to be registered against the petitioner in Cr.No.114 of 2020.

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

3. The case is still at 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 15.03.2021 has been filed before this Court which have been signed by the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. It is represented by learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) that petitioner and the second respondent appeared before the respondent police and reported the compromise. In the said Joint memo of Compromise, it has been stated that the petitioner and the second respondent have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their issues in Cr.No.114 of 2020. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

4. 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), and after exercising due caution as advised by the Hon'ble Suprme Court in The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10, this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashes the case in Cr.No.114 of 2020, pending on the file of the First Respondent.

5. This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Cr.No.114 of 2020, pending on the file of the First Respondent, is quashed and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order. *Herein enclosed the xerox copy of Joint memo Compromise. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar arr To

1. The Inspector of Police, B-6, Mappedu Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+1 cc to Mr.K.Elumalai, Advocate Sr.NO. 59876 Crl.O.P.No.5902 of 2021 SVB(CO) A.SK(06.12.2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/