A.Mahendran, v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.03.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.3685 of 2018 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.1776 of 2018 1.A.Mahendran 2.R.Angusamy 3.A.Aandal

...Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3

-VsState represented through The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.

(Crime No.2 of 2018) ...1st Respondent/ Complainant 2.Bhu vaneshvari ... 2nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the F.I.R., made in Crime No.2 of 2018 on the file of the 1st respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.Sadiq Raja For R-1 : Mr.Prabhu Ramachandran Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R-2 : Mr.T.K.Gopalan

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R., made in Crime No.2 of 2018 on the file of the 1st respondent police.

2.Heard Mr.Sadiq Raja, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr.Prabhu Ramachandran learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent and Mr.T.K.Gopalan, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. 3.The petitioners are accused No. 1 to 3 in Crime No.2 of 2018. Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, against the petitioners, the case was registered in Crime No.2 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent police, for the offence https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b) and 506(ii) of IPC. 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 First Information Report in Crime No.2 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 First Information Report in Crime No.2 of 2018, on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed, in respect of petitioners herein alone. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.

7.Accordingly, the Criminal Original petition is allowed. Consequently, connected Crl.M.P.(MD)No.1776 of 2018, is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CSII) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar das To ENCL: COPY OF COMPROMISE MEMO 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thirumangalam, Madurai District.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai +1 CC TO Mr. D.SADIQ RAJA , Advocate, Sr.No. 54757 +1 CC TO Mr. T.K.GOPALAN , Advocate, Sr.No. 54610 JAM/02/04/2018/ CM-VR / SAR 1 / 2P-5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.3685 of 2018 12.03.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/