Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10771/2017compromise ordered

Suriya Kala v. The Inspector Of Police

2017-08-17Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.08.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR CRL.O.P.(MD)No.10771 of 2017

1. Suriya Kala

2. Ragesh Sudar ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 -Vs1. The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.224 of 2017) ... Respondent/Complainant

2. Palammal ... Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the entire records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No.224 of 2017 pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station, Tirunelveli District, and to quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand For R-1 : Mr.K.Anbarasan, Government Advocate(Crl. Side).

For R-2 : Mr.P.Gunasekaran

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition is filed for quashing the First Information Report in Crime No.224 of 2017 pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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 the complaint lodged by the second respondent, a case was registered by the first respondent police in Crime No.224 of 2017 for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) of I.P.C., and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act.

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

4. Pursuant to the registration of the case in Crime No.224 of 2017, it appears that the parties are relatives and they have settled their dispute amicably out of Court, on the advise of the family members and elders. The parties also have entered into a compromise. The Joint Compromise Memo, dated 17.08.2017, signed by the petitioners and the second respondent/defacto complainant along with their counsel is produced before this Court. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the second respondent has no objection for quashing the First Information Report.

5. The parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their own free 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 specific terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, this Court is of the view that no useful or fruitful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence, on the basis of the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties, the Criminal Original petition is allowed and the First Information Report in Crime No.224 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent herein is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Writs) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To (Encl. Xerox copy of Joint Compromise memo)

1. The Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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

+1cc to M/S. R.ANAND, Advocate, SR.No.73157.

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.10771 of 2017 17.08.2017 pmu SDS/SKN:RSK/SAR 1/29.08.2017/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/