Ponmani v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. O.P(MD) No.1462 of 2025 1.Ponmani 2.Murugan 3.Karpagam.

... Petitioners Vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Usilampatti, Madurai.

(Crime No.600 of 2015) 2.Pethanasamy ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No.118 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Usilampatti, Madurai and quash the same. Page No. 1 of 5

For petitioners : Mr.M.Selvakumar For R1 : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl side) For R2 : Mr.B.Vinoth Kumar *****

O R D E R

This petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No.118 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Usilampatti, Madurai for the offences under Sections 147, 452, 294(b), 323 and 506(1) of IPC and quash the same.

2. According to the petitioner, the first petitioner and the second respondent are wife and the husband and due to the matrimonial dispute, complaint has been given by the second respondent. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the police has registered FIR in Crime No.118 of 2016, for the offences under Sections 147, 452, 294(b), 323 and 506(1) of IPC .

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel on Page No. 2 of 5

both sides represented that during pendency of the case in C.C.No.118 of 2016, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and to that effect, they have entered into a compromise and the same was filed before this Court.

4. Today, the defacto-complainant and all the accused are present and the Court enquired about the terms of compromise. The defactocomplainant represented that they entered into a compromise and he has no objection in allowing this petition. A compromise memo, dated 09.03.2024 signed by the parties and their respective counsels, is also filed before this Court.

5. This Court has perused the terms of the compromise memo.

6. Considering the nature of the offences, relationship between the parties and they have also entered into a compromise, along with the counter case, it is appropriate to allow this petition.

7. Recording the said compromise memo, this petition is allowed and C.C.No.118 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Page No. 3 of 5

No.I, Usilampatti, Madurai, is quashed.

27.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Usilampatti, Madurai 2.The Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Usilampatti, Madurai.

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

Page No. 4 of 5

P.DHANABAL,J apd Crl.OP(MD) No.1462 of 2025 27.03.2025 Page No. 5 of 5