Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/13065/2015allowed

G.Suresh, v. The Inspector Of Police,

2015-07-14Honourable Mr Justice M.M.Sundresh2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.07.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH CRL.O.P(MD)No.13065 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015

1. G.Suresh

2. Thangammal

3. Sadayandi @ Arumugam

4. Rajalakshmi

5. Viji ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 5 Vs.

1. The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Oomachikulam (M.Chathirapatti) Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.356/2015) ..1st Respondent/Complainant

2. Chinnaparukkan ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying this Court, to call for the records pertaining to the F.I.R. in Crime No.356 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.C.Jeganathan For R-1 : Mrs.S.Prabha Govt. Advocate(Crl.Side) For R-2 : Mr.R.Arjunarajan

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed for calling for the records pertaining to the F.I.R. in Crime No.356 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent police, and quash the same.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and also the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel for the second respondent.

3. The petitioners are arrayed as A1 to A5 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 366A of I.P.C., in Crime No.356 of 2015. 4.When the matter is taken up for hearing, a compromise memo has been filed and duly signed by them and attested by their respective counsel wherein it is stated that the petitioners and the second respondent are close relatives and the second respondent is not interested in proceeding with the matter further.

5. The Memo of Compromise also says that the second respondent came to know that the petitioners are not involved in the alleged offence and she has also sent a representation dated 06.07.2015 to the Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, to that effect. It is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

further stated that the victim girl has also been secured and she is also present before this Court.

6.In the light of the compromise memo, no purpose will be served by keeping the Criminal Original Petition pending. 7.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the FIR in Crime NO.356 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent, is quashed. The Compromise Memo shall form part of the record. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Oomachikulam (M.Chathirapatti) Police Station, Madurai District.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. +1cc to MR.C.JEGANATHAN, Advocate in SR.No. 38811 Pmu/Ns SR : 05.08.2015 : 2p/5c Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13065 of 2015 14.07.2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/