L.Anand, M/A 29 Years, v. The State Rep By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED:28.09.2021

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN CRL.O.P.NO.7866 OF 2017 AND CRL.M.P.NO.5672 OF 2017 L.Anand .. Petitioner/Accused 1 Vs.

1. State represented by its The Inspector of Police, W-35, All Women Police Station, Tambaram.

(Crime No.35/2015) .. 1st Respondent/Complainant

2. S.Sasikala .. 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer:

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No.35 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent Police and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

For Petitioner .. Mr.P.Gunaraj For R1 .. Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petition has been filed by A1 seeking to quash F.I.R in Crime No.35 of 2015, registered under Sections 417 and 506(i) of I.P.C by the first respondent/the Inspector of Police, W-35, All Women Police Station, Tambaram, on a complaint lodged by the second respondent.

2. It had been stated by the second respondent that the petitioner herein had committed said offences, particularly under Section 417 I.P.C. However, in view of further developments, wherein both the petitioner and the second respondent have, with much prudence, moved further in life, I https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

hold that keeping the First Information Report pending would not be to the advantage of both of them and would actually affect their future prospects.

3. An affidavit had also been filed by the petitioner herein. Having regards to the facts therein, and after hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and also the learned Counsel for the petitioner herein, I hold that investigation into the First Information Report would not be of any avail and that a clear reading of the First Information Report does not disclose that any cognizable offence has been made out.

4. As a matter of fact, it is more an expression of grievances, which had been reduced as a First Information Report by the first respondent. The first respondent could very well have called both the parties and tried to settle the issues instead of dragging them to criminal prosecution. The First Information Report does not stand. I am formed that First Information Report has already been quashed insofar as the second accused is concerned. It is now quashed as against the petitioner/A1 is concerned.

5. With the above said observation, the present Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar grs To 1.

The Inspector of Police, W-35, All Women Police Station, Tambaram.

2.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras-104.

+1cc to Mr.P.Gunaraj, Advocate, S.R.No.50012 Crl.O.P.No.7866 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.No.5672 of 2017 GPL(CO) CS/13/10/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/