R.Srinivasan, M/A 38 Years, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.09.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.No.21905 of 2018 R.Srinivasan ..Petitioner/1st Accused Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu Rep. By Sub-Inspector of Police, W8, All Woman Police Station, Thirumangalam, Chennai.

2.S.Subashree ..Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records and quash the Crime No.9 of 2015 on the file of the W8, All Woman Police Station, Thirumangalam, Chennai.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Sesubalan Raja For R1 : Ms.M.Prabhavathi, Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition has been filed to quash the proceedings of Crime No.9 of 2015 on the file of the W8, All Woman Police Station, Thirumangalam, Chennai as against the petitioner/first accused.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent.

3. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.9 of 2015. The second respondent in the petition is the defacto complainant in the above said crime number. The FIR in Crime No.9 of 2015 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 417, 406, 495, 313, 506(ii) IPC and r/w 4 of TNPWH Act, on the file of the first respondent police.

4. It appears that at the advise of the elders and friends, the petitioner and the second respondent have agreed to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

compromise the matter, out of Court. A Joint Compromise Memo is also filed to that effect. The petitioner and the second respondent appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have compromised the matter and signed in the Joint Compromise Memo on their own will and volition. The identities of the parties are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this Court. The identities of the parties are also confirmed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor through the first respondent police.

5.Having regard to the Compromise arrived at between the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending. Hence, the FIR in Cr.No.9 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent is quashed as against the petitioner alone.

ggi Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, W8, All Woman Police Station, Thirumangalam, Chennai.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+1cc to Mr.P.Sesubalan Raja, Advocate S.R.No.63538 KR/30/10/18 Crl.O.P.No.21905 of 2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/