Singaravelan @ Singaram v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.03.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.3655 of 2018 1.Singaravelan @ Singaram 2.Sangeswaran 3.Kannan 4.Malaisamy 5.Shenbaga Thevar 6.Gandhi 7.Lingam @ Gurulingam 8.Pitchaimuthu 9.Seeni @ Seeni Muthalagu 10.Mayandi @ Shenbaga Mayandi 11.Ramalingam ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 11 -Vs1. State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Thirupuvanam Police Station, Sivagangai District.

(Crime No.496 of 2001) ...1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Thannayiramoorthy ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant 3.Thirunavukarasu 4.Jayenthiran ... Respondent Nos.3 and 4 / Injured Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.191 of 2002 before the Additional District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai and quash the same as against the petitioners. For Petitioners :Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja For R-1 :Mr.A.P.G.Ohm Chairma Prabhu Government Advocate For R-2 :Mr.R.Ponkarthikeyan ***

ORDER

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in C.C.No.191 of 2002 from the Additional District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai and quash the same as against the petitioners.

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 11 in Crime No.496 of 2001. Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, against the petitioners, the case was registered in Crime No.496 of 2001, on the file of the first respondent police, for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 506 (ii) and 379 (NP) IPC @ 147, 148, 323, 324, 326 and 506(ii) I.P.C. After filing the charge sheet, the case was taken on file in C.C.No.191 of 2002, by the learned Additional District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai.

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, in the petition have agreed to quash the Charge Sheet in C.C.No.191 of 2002 on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai. 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 (Criminal 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 Charge Sheet in C.C.No.191 of 2002, on the file of the learned Additional District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai, is quashed in so far as the petitioners herein are concerned. 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 (CS-II) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar ENCL:XEROX COPY OF JOINT COMPROMISE MEMO To 1.The Additional District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Manamadurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thirupuvanam Police Station, Sivagangai District..

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

+1cc to Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja, Advocate, SR.No.56089 Crl.O.P.(MD) No.3655 of 2018 15.03.2018 ls KK/JC/12.04.2018/SAR-4/3P-5C