Poornachandhar v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.11.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE Ms.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA Crl.O.P.No.22609 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.No.14506 of 2022 Mr.Poornachandhar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Arakkonam, Ranipet District.

(Crime No.9 of 2022)

2. Ms.V.Pavinasaral Ivanchinal ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the FIR in Crime No.9 of 2022 on the file of the 1st respondent and to quash the same as against the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Anil Sandeep For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak, Additional Public Prosecutor 1/6

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the FIR in Crime No.9 of 2022 on the file of the 1st respondent and to quash the same as against the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are doctors by profession; the parties have amicably settled the issue between themselves and in pursuant to that, the defacto complainant does not want to pursue the matter further; therefore, a joint compromise memo dated 24.11.2022 was filed before this Court, wherein the defacto complainant and the accused have affixed their signatures by agreeing to the terms of compromise.

4. When the matter is taken up today, the petitioner and the 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant are present before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsels and Ms.R.Varalakshmi, Sub-Inspector 2/6

of Police, All Women Police Station, Arakkonam, Ranipet District. They stated that they had compromised the matter without any coercion or influence.

5. The records would show that the defacto complainant and the petitioner had a love affair between themselves and thereafter they developed misunderstanding. The defacto complainant has now stated that both of them had decided to bury their hatchet and move forward without interfering in each other's life any further.

6. In view of the young age and future of the petitioner and the defacto complainant, I feel no useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings pending. Even though the offences are non-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 power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prefers to quash the proceedings in Crime No.9 of 2022 on the file of the 1st respondent. 3/6

7. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and as a sequel, the further proceedings in Crime No.9 of 2022 on the file of the 1st respondent is quashed due to compromise. The Joint Compromise Memo shall form part of this Order. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Index: Yes/No 30.11.2022 Speaking / Non Speaking Order gsk 4/6

To 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Arakkonam, Ranipet District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

5/6

R.N.MANJULA, J.

gsk Crl.O.P.No.22609 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.No.14506 of 2022 30.11.2022 6/6