A.Mohanlal v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.03.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN A.Mohanlal ...Petitioner /Sole Accused Vs.

1. State through Deputy Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli.

2. The Inspector of Police, Alangulam Police Station, Tirunelveli.

(Crime No.20/2023) ...2nd Respondent/Complainant

3. M.Esakkimuthu ...3rd Respondent/Defacto Complainant

4. Ajithkumar ...4th Respondent/Victim PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to FIR in Crime No. 20/2023 dated 17.01.2023 pending on the file of the 2nd respondent and QUASH the same.

For Petitioners : Mr. Muthumalai.K For R1&R2 : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/5

For R3&R4 : Mr.S.Prasanth

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned FIR in Crime No.20 of 2023 on the file of the 2nd respondent police. 2.The contention of the petitioner is that based on the complaint lodged by the 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.20 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (va) of the Schedule Caste and the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, against the petitioner. 3.The further contention of the petitioner is that they compromised the issue with the 3rd respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioner and the 3rd respondent and also by their respective counsels. 4.The petitioner and the 3rd respondent appeared before this Court along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They 2/5

were also identified by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the Investigation Officer. The defacto complainant is present in person and submitted that the victim has not received any compensation from the Government. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has also confirmed the same. 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 petitioner and also in view of the joint compromise memo, dated 10.03.2023, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and inclined to quash all further proceedings in Crime No.20 of 2023 pending on the file of the 2nd respondent police in respect of this petitioner. 6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in Crime No.20 of 2023, pending on the file of the 2nd respondent police is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioner. The compromise memo is recorded and the terms of joint compromise memo 3/5

shall form part of this order.

10.03.2023 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No TM To

1. Deputy Superintendent of Police Tirunelveli.

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

4/5

G.ILANGOVAN ,J.

TM 10.03.2023 5/5