Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2897/2018allowed

Thangam v. The Inspector Of Police

2018-02-23Honourable Mr Justice P. Rajamanickam2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.02.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2897 of 2018 1.Thangam 2.Aravindu @ Aravind 3.Jeyakumar ... Petitioners/ Accused Nos.1 to 3 -Vs1. The State represented by its The Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai District.

... 1st Respondent/Complainant (Crime No.83 of 2018)

2. Balamurugan ... 2nd Respondent/ De facto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition - filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the case in Crime No.83 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent police station, by accepting the Joint compromise memo dated 20.02.2018.

For Petitioners : M/s.R.Gowrishankar For 1st Respondent : Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu Government Advocate (Crl.side) For 2nd Respondent : Mr.P.Ramachandran

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the case in Crime No.83 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent police station, by accepting the Joint compromise memo dated 20.02.2018.

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

3. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.83 of 2018. Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent against the petitioners, a case was registered in Crime No.83 of 2018 under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(2) IPC and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act 2015.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

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 case in Crime No.83 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 case in Crime No.83 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 (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl.: Xerox copy of Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, Madurai District.

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

+ 1 CC TO Mr.R.GOWRI SHANKAR, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 51085 SM TE/JC/SAR-4 : 09/03/2018 : 2P/4C Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2897 of 2018 Dated: 23.02.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/