Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/952/2021allowed

Murugesan v. The Inspector Of Police

2021-02-03Honourable Mrs Justice R. Hemalatha2 pages

Crl.OP(MD).No.952 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.02.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA Crl.OP(MD)No.952 of 2021 Murugesan ... Petitioner/Sole Accused vs.

1.State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, Silaiman Police Station, Madurai District. ...1st Respondent/Complainant (Crime No.300 of 2013) 2.K.Selvam ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in SC.No.354 of 2019 pending on the file of the III Additional Sub Court, Madurai and quash the same.

For Petitioner :Mr.P.Aju Tagore For R1 :Mr.A.Robinson, Government Advocate(Criminal Side) For R2 :Mr. P.R. Prithvi Raj

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the SC.No.354 of 2019 pending on the file of the III Additional Sub Court, Madurai on the basis of a joint compromise memo filed by the petitioner and the second respondent.

2.The contention of the petitioner is that based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first respondent registered a case in Crime No.300 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324 and 307 of Indian Penal Code. 3.The further contention of the petitioner is that he wants to compromise the issue between him and the second respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise is filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioner and the second respondent and also by their respective counsels.

4.The petitioner and the second respondent appeared in person along with their respective counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards before this Court. They were also identified by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) and Mr.A.Kesavan, Special Subhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.OP(MD).No.952 of 2021 Inspector of Police, Silaiman Police Station, Madurai District. Both the parties to compromise were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Hence the Compromise Memo is recorded.

5. Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner and also in view of the joint compromise memo, dated 18.01.2021, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending.

6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in SC.No.354 of 2019, on the file of the III Additional Sub Court, Madurai District, is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioner/sole accused and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

Encl: Xerox copy of Joint Compromise Memo To 1.The III Additional Sub Court, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Silaiman Police Station, Madurai District.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Crl.OP(MD)No.952 of 2021 03.02.2021 VB (16.02.2021) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2