Velmurugan v. Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.11.2021 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl. O.P. No.20403 of 2021

1. Velmurugan

2. Pandidurai

3. R.Ramasamy

4. Vetrivel

5. Vinoth

6. Prakash

7. Ramesh

8. Ilayaraja.

. . . Petitioners

Versus

State rep by,

1. The Inspector of Police, Sethaiyathoppu Police Station, in Crime No.6 of 2014, Cuddalore District.

2. Gnanasekar . . . Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to call for records in C.C.No.224 of 2016 pending on the file of Learned Judicial Magistrate No.I at Chidambaram, quash the same.

For petitioners :

Mr.T.Padmanabhan For respondents :

Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (crl.side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for records in C.C.No.224 of 2016 pending on the file of Learned Judicial Magistrate No.I at Chidambaram, quash the same.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 07.01.20214 due to previous election enmity, the petitioners 1 to 3 abused and assaulted the defacto complainant with unparliamentary words and hence the complaint came to be registered against the petitioners.

4. The case is still at the stage of trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves. 5.A Joint compromise Memo deed dated 25.10.2021 has been filed by the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant. The petitioner and the second respondent are present before this Court. In the Memo, it is stated that compromise was arrived and the Petitioners and the Second Respondent/defacto complainant decided to settle the dispute in amicable way. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

6.Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the First Information Report pending, even though, the offences involved are 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), and after exercising due caution as advised by the Hon'ble Suprme Court in The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10), this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashes the proceedings in C.C.No.224 of 2016, on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chidambaram.

7.This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in C.C.No.224 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chidambaram, is quashed against the petitioners.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar arr

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Chidambaram.

2. The Inspector of Police, Sethaiyathoppu Police Station, in Crime No.6 of 2014, Cuddalore District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+1cc to Mr.T.Padmanabhan, Advocate, S.R.No.62172 Crl. O.P. No. 20403 of 2021 PM(CO) SU(13/12/2021)