Sikkandar Set v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.03.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR Sikkandar ... Petitioner/ Sole Accused Vs.

1.State represented by The Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

(Crime No.95 of 2022) ... 1st Respondent/ Complainant 2.Syed Ali Fathima ... 2nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records relating to the FIR in Crime No.95 of 2022 dated 05.05.2022 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Mari Chelliah Prabhu For R1 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R2 : Mr.B.Muneeswaran 1/6

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking orders to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No.95 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there existed previous dispute between the petitioner and the second respondent/defacto complainant and that on 05.05.2022, the petitioner had abused the second respondent in filthy language and threatened her and also attacked the second respondent's husband.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner 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.95 of 2022 dated 05.05.2022 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 341, 355 and 506(1) IPC and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 against the petitioner.

2/6

4. The case is still under the investigation. 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 petitioner and the second respondent and also by their respective counsel. The petitioner and the second respondent were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by Mr.Sivakumar, Sub Inspector, Thiruchuli Police Station as well as by the learned counsels appearing for the parties. This Court also 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 now the parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has power to quash the complaint for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 341, 355 and 506(1) IPC and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. 3/6

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 Crime No.95 of 2022 pending before the first respondent police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.95 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order. 03.03.2023 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No csm 4/6

To

1. The Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

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

5/6

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

csm Order made in Dated: 03.03.2023 6/6