Dr.Raviprasad v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.02.2015

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN Crl.O.P.No.2565 of 2015 Raviprasad ..Petitioner/Accused vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch EDF-I Wing, Team-II, Vepery, Chennai 600 007.

2.S.Arunkumar ..Respondents/Complainant Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to call for entire records in Crime No.398 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police and to quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Devendhiran For Respondents: Mr.M.Maharaja Addl.Public Prosecutor.

R2 : (Mr.T.Arasakumar) S.Arunkumar R2 Appeared in person

O R D E R

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to quash the FIR No.398 of 2014. The first respondent police received the complaint by the second respondent against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 506(i) of I.P.C.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and the second respondent have settled the differences and also entered into memorandum of understanding dated 19.09.2014, by which, the second respondent understood to withdraw the complaint given by him in Cr.No.398 of 2014.

2. As per memorandum of compromise, the petitioner has also paid a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- and therefore, the memorandum of compromise is accepted and the petition is allowed.

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

3. The second respondent is present in the Court and he is identified by the Inspector of Police/first respondent. The second respondent having entered into memo of compromise dated 19.09.2014 and also memorandum of compromise filed by him along with the second respondent before this Court. Today he has also admitted the receipt of a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- and submitted that the complaint given by him, may be quashed.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that though offences are not compoundable, having regard to the fact that only FIR has been registered the same may be considered.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the second respondent, who appeared in person and admitted that he entered into memorandum of understanding between the petitioner and the second respondent and also agreed to withdraw the complaint against the petitioner and filed a memo of compromise before this court today and investigation is not culminated into charge sheet, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the F.I.R, is quashed.

-s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) Dt:24/2/2015 True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To

1. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch EDF-I Wing, Team-II, Vepery, Chennai 600 007.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+ 2 ccs to Mr.V.Devendhiran, Advocate SR 8127 ad(co) prk24/2 Crl.O.P.No.2565 of 2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/