Pandi v. The Deputy Superintendent Of

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.02.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2148 of 2018 Pandi ..Petitioner/ Sole Accused -Vs1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Usilampatti,

2. State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Valandur Police Station, (Cr.No.283 of 2017) ... Respondents. 1 & 2/ Complainants 3.Duraipandi ... 3rd Respondent/ Defact Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the case in Cr.No.283 of 2017 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Valandur Police Station, Madurai and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Mithunchakravarthi For Respondent : Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu Government Advocate (Crl.side) for R1 & R2 : Mr.W.Pamelin For R3

ORDER

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in Cr.No.283 of 2017 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Valandur Police Station, Madurai.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first and second respondents, the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent.

3.The petitioner is sole accused in Crime No.283 of 2017. Based on the complaint lodged by the third respondent, a case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506(2) IPC, 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2003 and 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

4.It appears that the petitioner and the third respondent, namely, the de-facto complainant have settled their dispute amicably out of Court and they have also entered into a compromise, on the advise of elders and their relatives. A Joint Compromise Memo, signed by both parties, in the presence of their respective counsel, is also produced before this Court. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the third respondent, has no objection for quashing the FIR in Cr.No. 283 of 2017 on the file of the second respondent.

5.The parties 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 second 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 FIR in Cr.No.283 of 2017 on the file of the second respondent / The Inspector of Police, Valandur Police Station, Madurai, 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(CS-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl: Xerox copy of compromise memo To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Usilampatti,

2. The Inspector of Police, Valandur Police Station,

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, + 1 cc TO Mr.A.Mithunchakravarthi , Advocate in SR No. 47889 rmk AE/JC/SAR2/08.03.2018/3P/5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2148 of 2018 12.02.2018