S.Anbarasan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.08.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10647 of 2017 S. Anbarasan ... Petitioner / Sole accused -Vs1. State rep.by The Inspector of Police, SIPCOT Police Station, Tuticorin, Tuticorin District.

(Crime No.137 of 2013) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant

2. A. Rajamani ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto- Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No.137 of 2013 on the file of the respondent Police and quash the same.

For Petitioner :

Mr.K.A. Raama Krishnan For R-1 :

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

For R-2 :

Mr. R. Subramaniya Adhityan ***

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition is filed to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No.137 of 2013 on the file of the respondent Police and quash the same.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner 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 a complaint given by the second respondent, a case was registered in Crime No.137 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 307 and 341 of IPC against the petitioner.

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

4. Pursuant to the filing of the above Criminal Original

petition, the parties have entered into a compromise, dated 09.08.2017, on the advise of the elders and well wishers. In the Compromise Memo, the second respondent agreed to withdraw the criminal case and expressed his no objection to quash the First Information Report.

5. The parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms, that the Joint Compromise Memo signed by them was 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. In view of the Compromise Memo signed by the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence, the Criminal Original petition is allowed and the proceedings in Crime No.137 of 2013 on the file of the first respondent is quashed in toto, on the basis of the compromise memo signed by the parties concerned before this Court and the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AD-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector of Police, SIPCOT Police Station, Tuticorin, Tuticorin District.

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

+1cc to Mr.S.SENTHIL SANKARA NATHA KUMAR Advocate in SR. NO.72813 TRP JS/GT/SAR.2/29.08.2017/2P-4C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10647 of 2017 11.08.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/