Raja v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.03.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR 1.Raja 2.Karnan 3.Balamurugan 4.Mariyammal ... Petitioners Vs.

1.The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station, Madurai District.

2.Pandiyammal ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in connection with the impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.84 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti and quash the same in so far as the petitioners are concerned.

For Petitioners : Mr.G.Manikandan 1/6

For R1 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R2 : Mr.K.Dhanaraj

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking orders to call for the records in connection with the impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.84 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti and quash the same in so far as the petitioners are concerned.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the brother of the defacto complainant's husband, one Kandavel got married to one Kushbu. Due to the quarrel between them, Kushbu consumed poison on 12.08.2020, for which, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant in filthy language, attacked her and threatened her with dire consequences. 2/6

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the second respondent has lodged a complaint before the first respondent and on that basis, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.1668 of 2020 and after investigation and filing of the final report, the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No.84 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti for the offences under Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(1) IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act against the petitioners 4.The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

5.A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court which have been signed by the petitioners and the second respondent and also by their respective counsels. The petitioners and the second respondent are present before this Court and and they were identified by Mr.A.Muthukrishnan, Head Constable-394, Vadipatti Police Station as well as by the learned counsels appearing for the parties. This Court also 3/6

enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

6.In the instant case, the dispute is of personal in nature and the parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has to power to quash the complaint for the offence under Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(1) IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act.

7.The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Panjab and another reported in (2012)10 SCC 303 and Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath) reported in (2017)9 SCC 641 were taken into consideration. 8.In the light of the guidelines issued in the above said Judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings in C.C.No.84 of 2021 as against the petitioners pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.

4/6

9.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.84 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti, is quashed as against the petitioners and the joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order. 01.03.2023 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No gns To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti.

2.The Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station, Madurai District.

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

5/6

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

gns 01.03.2023 6/6