Murugan v. The Inspector Of Police

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2869 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.08.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2869 of 2021 1.Murugan 2.Chinnamuthu @ Muthulakshmi ... Petitioners/Accused No.1&2 Vs.

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

In Crime No.244 of 2017 ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Sujitha ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records in Crime No.244 of 2017 on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same. For Petitioners : Mr.G.Kasinatha Durai For R1 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) For R2 : M/s.R.Ranjitha

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned FIR in Crime No.244 of 2017 on the file of the 1st respondent police. 2.The contention of the petitioners is that based on the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.244 of 2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 324 and 506(2) of IPC against the petitioners. It appears that the defacto complainant and the 1st accused are the husband and wife. Later, they got divorce from the Court of the learned Judge, Family Court, Madurai. After divorce, they are not interested in proceeding further in the criminal case. Hence, they filed a memo of compromise dated 10.01.2021.

3.The further contention of the petitioners is that they compromised the issue with the 2nd respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioners and the 2nd respondent and also by their respective counsels.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2869 of 2021 4.The petitioners and the 2nd respondent appeared through video conference from the Office of the Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) before this Court along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They were also identified by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) and the Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Hence, the Compromise Memo is recorded.

5.Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners and also in view of the joint compromise memo, dated 10.01.2021, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending. Hence, all further proceedings in Crime No.244 of 2017 pending on the file of the 1st respondent police is quashed and the compromise memo is recorded.

6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in Crime No.244 of 2017, pending on the file of the 1st respondent police is hereby quashed and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) mm Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. To Encl. Joint Compromise Memo 1.Inspector of Police, Vadipatti Police Station, Madurai District.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2869 of 2021 02.08.2021 RK (10.08.2021) 2P 3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2