Manimaala Ashok v. Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.12.2021

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR CRL.O.P.NO.21807 OF 2021

1. Manimaala Ashok

2. S.Ashokumar

3. R.Jeyakumar ... Petitioners/Accused

Versus

1. The State Through The Inspector of Police, R-5, Virugambakkam Police Station, Virugambakkam, Chennai City.

Crime No.80 of 2020

2. T.Mathimaaran ... Respondents/Complainant/ Defacto Complainant PRAYER:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in Crime No.80 of 2020 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioners :

Mr.S.Vijayakumar For Respondents :

Mr.E.Raj Thilak, For R1 Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records connected with the case in Crime No.80 of 2020 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent/de-facto complainant is running Granite Business and he is also a Trustee of Pranic Healing Centre. One Tamilselvi was working as an instructor in the said Centre and she acted

against the rules and regulations, and hence, she was dismissed. The petitioners on vengeance, created fake suicide letter and videos in the name of one Charumathi and blackmailed the second respondent/de-facto complainant. Hence, the second respondent/ de-facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioners and a case in Crime No.80 of 2020 was registered against them for the offences under Sections 465, 385 and 506(1) IPC.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the advice of the village elders, both the petitioners and the second respondent decided to settle the issue amicably, more particularly, the second respondent agreed to drop further criminal prosecution against the petitioners. Hence, they filed this petition to quash the FIR.

4. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

5. It is seen that by passage of time, the parties have decided to compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

6. The parties are appeared before this Court through Video conferencing. The Affidavit dated 08.10.2021 was filed by the petitioner wherein it has been stated that both the parties entered in to a compromise in presence of elders and the de-facto complainant to withdraw the case against the petitioner. This Court enquired both the parties and satisfied that both the parties settled the matter amicably.

7. Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the FIR No.80 of 2020 pending. Even though, the offence involved is 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), this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., inclined to quash the Crime No.80 of 2020.

8. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the Crime No.80 of 2020, on the file of the first respondent Police, is quashed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar dna

To 1.

The Inspector of Police, R-5, Virugambakkam Police Station, Virugambakkam, Chennai City.

2.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+2ccs to Mr.S.Vijayakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.65156 CRL.O.P.NO.21807 OF 2021 RGN(CO) PBS/27/12/2021