K.Ramadoss v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.11.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P.No.21994 of 2021
1. K.Ramdoss
2. B.James @ Raj Vigneswar
3. Velu @ Ukkuravel ..Petitioners
Versus
1. State Represented by The Inspector of Police T-7, Tank Factory Police Station Avadi, Chennai (Crime No.393 of 2021)
2. P.Sujatha
...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in Crime No.398 of 2021 on the file of Inspector of Police, T-7, Tank Factory Police Station, Avadi, Chennai and quash the same. For Petitioner :
Mr.M.Krishnamoorthy For Respondents: Mr.E.Raj Thilak (R1) Additional Public Prosecutor K.Senthilnaathan (R2)
O R D E R
This petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused to call for the records in Crime No.398 of 2021 on the file of Inspector of Police, T-7, Tank Factory Police Station, Avadi, Chennai and quash the same.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.11.2021, at about 12.30 P.M., the petitioners with intent to prevent the Defacto complainant as the Assistant Executive Engineer, Operation & Maintenance, Veerapuram, Chennai from discharging her duty, had caused disturbance in the execution of her duty as public servant.
3.The case is still at the stage of investigation. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves. 4.An Affidavit dated 15.11.2021 has been filed by the second respondent/defacto complainant and the Common Affidavit dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
15.11.2021 filed by both the parties before this Court. The petitioner and the second respondent/defacto complainant were also present through video conferencing. In the above said Affidavit and Memo of Joint Compromise, it has been stated that the petitioner and the second respondent/defacto complainant have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their issues in FIR.No.398 of 2021. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.
5.Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the First Information Report pending, even though, the offences involved are 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 Gujarat), 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 First Information Report in FIR.No.398 of 2021, on the file of the 1st respondent Police.
6.This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the investigation in Crime No 398 of 2021, on the file of the 1st respondent police, is quashed against the petitioners. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar arr To
1. The Inspector of Police T-7, Tank Factory Police Station Avadi, Chennai
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
+1cc to M/s.M.Krishnamoorthy, Advocate, S.R.No.61139 Crl.O.P.No.21994 of 2021 RGN(CO) RGA(21/12/2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/