Chitravel v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.09.2016 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.O.P.No.30359 of 2015 1.Chitravel 2.Ramalingam ... Petitioners/Accused 1 & 2 Vs.

1. State represented by Inspector of Police Central Crime Branch Team-1, Vepery, Chennai.

... 1st Respondent/Complainant

2. G.Rajamanikkam ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records and quash the FIR in Crime No.135 of 2014 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Annamalai For R1 : Mr.C.Emalias, Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.E.Palani

ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to the FIR in Crime No.135 of 2014 pending on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

2. On a complaint lodged by one G.Rajamanikkam (defacto complainant/second respondent), the first respondent police registered a case in Crime No.135 of 2014 on 11.03.2014 for the

offences under Sections 408, 420 and 109 IPC against Chitravel and Ramalingam, quashing which, Chitravel and Ramalingam are before this Court on the ground that the parties have arrived at a compromise.

3. Today, the defacto complainant G.Rajamanikkam is present and is represented by a counsel by name Mr.E.Palani, Enrol.No.1299/2003. Mr.S.Nesaian, Sub Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, EDFI, Team-I, Vepery, Chennai-7, is also present and he has identified the defacto complainant.

4. The parties have filed a compromise memo dated 21.04.2016, wherein, it is stated as follows: "It is submitted that the above case in Crime No.135 of 2014 was registered by the 1st respondent police for the offence 408, 420 and 109 of IPC on the basis of complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant.

Now at the intervention of the well-wishers of the both side, the issue has been compromised between parties and the defacto complainant is not willing to proceed with the case. In view of the amicable settlement among the parties, the defacto complainant has no objection for quashing the F.I.R in Crime No.135 of 2014 pending on file of the 1st respondent police.

It is therefore prayed that in view of the compromise between parties, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the F.I.R in crime No.135 of 2014 pending on the file of the 1st respondent police and pass such other order as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper and thus render justice."

5. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the FIR in Crime No.135 of 2014 on the file of the first respondent is quashed as against all the accused including those, who are not before this Court.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(J) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rk

To

1. The Inspector of Police Central Crime Branch Team-1, Vepery, Chennai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras-104.

+1cc to Mr.S.Annamalai, Advocate, S.R.No.51969 Crl.O.P.No.30359 of 2015 GR(CO) CA(03/10/2016)