← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2094/2018allowed

Arumugavel @ Apple v. The Inspector Of Police

2018-02-12Honourable Mr Justice P. Rajamanickam2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.02.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2094 of 2018 Arumugavel @ Apple

...Petitioner/Sole Accused

-Vs1. The State rep. by Inspector of Police, Kadambur Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

(Crime No.8 of 2018) ... Respondent/Complainant

2. Mr.Karuppasamy ... Respondent/ Defacto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in connection with the impugned FIR in Crime No.8 of 2018, dated 14.01.2018 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kadambur Police Station, Thoothukudi District and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu For R-1 : Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R-2 : Mr.R.Amarnath

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in connection with the impugned FIR in Crime No.8 of 2018 dated 14.01.2018 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kadambur Police Station, Thoothukudi District and quash the same. 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

3.The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.8 of 2018. Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, against the petitioner, the case was registered in Crime No.8 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent police, for the offence punishable https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) IPC and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act.

4.It appears that on the advice of friends and elders, the parties have entered into compromise and a Joint Compromise Memo, signed by both parties, in the presence of their respective counsel, is also filed. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has agreed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.8 of 2018. 5.The parties have appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their own free will and volition. The identity of the parties are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this Court. The identity of the parties are also confirmed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) through the first respondent police.

6.Having regard to the specific terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence the First Information Report in Crime No.8 of 2018, on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.

7.Accordingly, the Criminal Original petition is allowed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl:Xerox copy of Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, Kadambur Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

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

+1cc to M/s. G.Thalaimutharasu,Advocate in SR.NO.48187 cp MV:GT:SAR4:15/03/2018/2P/4C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2094 of 2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 12.02.2018