Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2839/2014allowed

K.Gurunathan v. The Inspector Of Police

2016-11-17Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:17.11.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2839 of 2014 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014 1.G.Sonai 2.K.Gurunathan 3.G.Nageshwari 4.A.Sangeetha .. Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 -vs1.The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Samayanallur, Madurai District.

Crime.No.52 of 2013 ..1st Respondent/Complainant 2.S.Karthiyaieni ..2nd respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records in connection with the Crime No.52 of 2013 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same. For Petitioners : Mr.M.Sankar For R-1 : Mr.P.Kannithevan, Government Advocate Crl.Side

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the F.I.R in Crime No.52 of 2013 on the file of the 1st respondent.

2. It is seen that F.I.R is pending against the petitioners in Crime No.52 of 2013 on the file of the first respondent police for the offence under Section 498(A) of I.P.C and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Harassment of Women Act, 2002.

3. When the matter came up for hearing today, the petitioner and the second respondent, appeared in person and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) through the respondent police and the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the matter is now compromised out of the Court and the defacto complainant had no objection to quash the F.I.R. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The petitioner filed an affidavit stating that he agreed to pay Rs.1,000/- per month towards maintenance to his daughter namely S.Panhi Panitha Dharshini and after receiving pay under 7th Pay Commission, he is ready to pay Rs.2,000/- per month.

5. This Court is of the view that since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement by way of compromise among themselves and the defacto complainant has no objection to quash the F.I.R in Crime No.52 of 2013 on the file of the first respondent, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the F.I.R in Crime No.52 of 2013 on the file of the first respondent, is hereby quashed. However, the parties are at liberty to file a maintenance case in future, to revise the maintenance amount. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(co) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Samayanallur, Madurai District.

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

+1cc to Mr.M.Sankar, Advocate SR.No.70559 pm sm:PV:30/11/2016:2P/4C Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2839 of 2014 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014 17.11.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/