Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10299/2017allowed

Meenakshi Sundaram v. The Inspector Of Police

2017-08-07Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.08.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10299 of 2017 1.Meenakshisundaram 2.Kavitha ... Petitioners/Accused 1 and 2 -Vs1. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch (ALGSC), Anti land Grabbing Special Cell, Madurai City.

(Crime No.37 of 2017) ... Respondent/Complainant

2. Senthilavathi ... Respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for records relating to the petitioners against in the First Information Report in Crime No.37 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent Police and quash the same.

For Petitioner :

Mr.R. Udhayakumar For R-1 :

Mr.K.Anbarasan, Government Advocate(Crl.side).

For R-2 : Mr.R. Gandhi ***

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition is filed to call for records relating to First Information Report in Crime No.37 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent Police and quash the same.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

3. On the basis of complaint received from the second respondent, a case was registered in Crime No. 37 of 2017 as against the petitioners / A1 and A2 for the offences under Sections 120(b), 447, 427, 465, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC on the file of the first respondent Police.

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

4. It appears that parties viz., petitioners and the de facto complainant have settled the dispute outside the Court amicably. A joint compromise memo has been filed before this Court along with quash petition, dated 31.07.2017. As per the joint compromise memo, the petitioners as well as the defacto complainant have compromised the matter between them and the second respondent has no objection for withdrawing the criminal case and to quash the proceedings.

5. The parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed in the Joint Compromise Memo on their own 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 terms of the joint memo of compromise, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence the criminal proceedings pending in Crime No.37 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent Police, is quashed in toto and 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-III) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl: Xerox copy of Joint Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, City Crime Branch (ALGSC), Anti land Grabbing Special Cell, Madurai City.

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

+1 CC to M/s.R.UDHAYAKUMAR, Advocate, SR No. 70788. +1 CC to M/s. R.GANDHI, Advocate, SR No. 70805. TRP PSM/JC/SAR4/17.08.2017/2P/5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10299 of 2017 07.08.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/