Ganesan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.02.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2998 of 2018 1.Ganesan 2.Meenakshi 3.Annamalai ... Petitioners/ Accused Nos. 1 to 3 -Vs1. The State by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.

(Cr.No.20 of 2015) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Vidyalakshmi ... 2nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for records pertaining to the C.C.No.14 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai District and quash the same. For Petitioners : M/s.S.S.Sathya Chidambaram For 1stRespondent : Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu Government Advocate (Crl.side) For 2nd Respondent : Mr.N.Saravanan

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for records pertaining to the C.C.No.14 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai District and quash the same.

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 accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No. 20 of 2015 Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, a case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 of I.PC., r/w Section 4 Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act and charge sheet has also been filed. Based on the said charge sheet the learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai District, has taken the case on file as C.C.No.14 of 2017 and the same is pending.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.It appears that the petitioners and the second 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 second respondent, has no objection for quashing the proceedings in C.C.No..14 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai District against the accused Nos.1 to 3 alone.

5.The parties are 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 proceedings in C.C.No.14 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai District against the accused Nos.1 to 3 alone, 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(AS) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl: Xerox copy of Joint Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Devakottai, Sivagangai District..

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

+1cc to Mr.S.S.Sathya Chidambaram, Advocate Sr.No.51782 DSS VB/GT/SAR4/15/03/2018/2P/4C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2998 of 2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 27.02.2018