S.Murugan v. State By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.10.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Ms.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA Crl.O.P.No.7124 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.No . 4737 of 2021 1.S.Murugan 2.S.Kalaiarasi 3.S.Madhan Raj ... Petitioners Vs.
1.State Rep by:
The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, M.K.B.Nagar Police Station, Chennai.
[Crime No.4 of 2021] 2.Mrs.M.Susiladevi ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the entire records connected with the FIR in Crime No.4 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent police herein and quash the same. For Petitioners : Mr.V.S.Senthil Kumar For Respondents : Mr.A.Damodaran, APP for R1 : Mr.Sridhar for R2
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been preferred to call for the entire records connected with the FIR in Crime No.4 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent police herein and quash the same.
1/4
2. Heard Mr.V.S.Senthil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.A.Damodaran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and Mr.Sridhar, learned counsel for the second respondent.
3. During the pendency of the case, it is seen that the second respondent/defacto complainant has settled all the disputes between herself and the petitioners, especially with her husband the first petitioner herein amicably. The parties have entered into a joint memo of compromise on 18.10.2022.
4. When the matter is taken up today, the petitioners and the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant are present before this Court and identified by their respective counsel and Ms.K.Vanitha, WHC 25240, W18 AWPS, M.K.B.Nagar. In order to identify the respective parties, they have also produced the copies of the Aadhaar Cards. The terms of compromise were read over to the petitioners and the second respondent. They accepted it to be true and stated that it has been entered between themselves without any coercion or influence.
2/4
5. In view of the terms of compromise, the second respondent and the petitioners have agreed to purchase peace and part their ways separately. Since the complaint was given purely because of the marital discord between the second respondent and the first petitioner / first accused, I feel it is appropriate to allow the parties to live at peace, in view of the compromise entered into between themselves.
6. Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings pending. Therefore, 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 power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prefers to quash the proceedings in Crime No.4 of 2021, on the file of the 1st respondent.
7. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and as a sequel, the further proceedings in Crime No.4 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent, is quashed due to compromise. The Joint Compromise Memo shall form part of this Order. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Index: Yes/No 18.10.2022 Speaking / Non Speaking Order gsk 3/4
R.N.MANJULA, J.
gsk To 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, M.K.B.Nagar Police Station, Chennai.
2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
Crl.O.P.No.7124 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.No.4737 of 2021 18.10.2022 4/4