Selvam v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.03.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.3337 of 2018 and Crl.M.P.(MD).No.1552 of 2018 1.Selvam 2.Saranraj 3.R.Karthick Kumar 4.M.Arunkumar 5.M.Venkatesh ... Petitioner/Accused Nos.1 to 5 -Vs1. The State represented by its, The Inspector of Police, Puliyangudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District, (In Crime No.62 of 2018) ...1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Rajkumar ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Cr.No.62/2018 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.M.Karunakaran For R-1 : Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu Government Advocate For R-2 : M/s.Veera Associates

ORDER

This Criminal Original petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Cr.No.62/2018 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same. as against the petitioners. 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second

respondent.

3.The petitioners are accused in Crime No.62 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent Police. The second respondent is the defacto complainant in the above said crime number. 4.The complaint in Crime No. 62 of 2018 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 323 and 506(i) I.P.C and r/w Sections 3(1) (r), 3(1) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, on the file of the first respondent police. The petitioners are arrayed as accused in the above said crime number. The first respondent is investigating the matter.

5.In the mean while, it appears that at the advise of the elders and friends, the petitioners and second respondent have agreed to compromise the matter, out of Court. A joint Compromise Memo, dated 05.03.2018, is also filed to that effect. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has given his consent to quash the entire proceedings in Cr.No.62 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent. 6.The parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed in the Joint Compromise Memo on their own will and volition. The identities of the parties are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this Court. The identities of the parties are also confirmed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) through the first respondent police.

7.Having regard to the agreement made between the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. As per the Compromise Memo signed by the parties, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has agreed to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.62 of 2018. Hence the criminal proceedings in Cr.No.62 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent police are quashed in respect of these petitioners and the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.

8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar

Encl.: Xerox copy of Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, Puliyangudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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

+ 1 CC TO Mr.VEERA ASSOCIATES, IN SR No. 53696 + 1 CC TO Mr.K.M.KARUNAKARAN, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 53564 VS TE/KK/SAR-2 : 28/03/2018 : 3P/5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.3337 of 2018 and Crl.M.P.(MD).No.1552 of 2018 07.03.2018