Chandran @ Chandrasekar v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.12.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN 1.Chandran @ Chandrasekar 2.Ramesh @ Rameshkumar 3.Muthumari 4.Gurusamy 5.Muthupandi ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 5 Vs.

1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruchuli, 2.State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, In Crime No.128 of 2022.

... Respondents/Complainant 3.Suresh ...3rd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to in Spl S.C No.27/2022 on the file of the Special court SC/ST (POA) Act Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District in Crime No. 128/2022 u/s 147, 294(b), 323, 506(1), 149 of IPC r/w 3(1) (r) 3(1)(s) 3(2)(va) of SC/ST(POA) Act.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balamurugapandi For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar for R1 & R2 Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Mr.T.Venkatesan for R3

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the charge sheet in Spl.S.C.No.27 of 2022 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Srivilliputtur, 2.The contention of the petitioners is that based on the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.128 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections u/s 147, 294(b), 323, 506(1), 149 of IPC r/w 3(1) (r) 3(1)(s) 3(2)(va) of SC/ST(POA) Act, against the petitioners. 3.The further contention of the petitioners is that they compromised the issue with the 2nd respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioners and the 2nd respondent and also by their respective counsels. 2/5

4.The petitioners and the 2nd respondent appeared before this Court along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They were also identified by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) and the Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. The compensation amount of Rs.90,000/- received by the victim was returned to the Government Account. Receipt was also filed to that effect. Hence, the Compromise Memo is recorded.

5.Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners and also in view of the joint compromise memo, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and inclined to quash all further proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.27 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District in respect of the petitioners. 6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and 3/5

the entire proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.27 of 2022, pending on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioners alone. The compromise memo is recorded and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order. 18.12.2023 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No TM To 1.The Sessions Judge, Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Srivilliputtur, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thiruchuli, 3.The Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

G.ILANGOVAN ,J.

TM 18.12.2023 5/5