Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/1089/2017allowed

Murugaraja v. The State Rep. By

2017-02-02Honourable Mr Justice G. Chockalingam3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.02.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHOCKALINGAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1089 of 2017 Murugaraja .. Petitioner/Sole Accused -Vs1. The State Rep. by, The Sub Inspector of Police, Chinnamanoor Police Station, Theni District.

(Crime No.3 of 2017) ... Respondent / Complainant

2. Priya @ Chinna Eswari ... 2nd Respondent / De-facto complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in Crime No.3 of 2017 on the file of the Sub Inspector of Police, Chinnamanoor Police Station, Theni District and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Uthayakumar For R1 : Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R2 : Mr.G.Vishnuram

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to quash the case in Crime No.3 of 2017 on the file of the Sub Inspector of Police, Chinnamanoor Police Station, Theni District.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the second respondent and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the first respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that based on the complaint given by the second respondent/de facto complainant, a case has been registered against the petitioner in Crime No.3 of 2017, for the offences under Section 354-A of IPC., read with Section 4 of Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 and Sections 3(1) w(i), 3(2), (va) of SC/ST Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, on the file of the first respondent police and the same is pending.

4. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, both the petitioner as well as the second respondent are 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 they categorically made a statement that the dispute between them have been settled amicably. They also filed a joint memo of compromise dated 30.01.2017, duly signed by both parties and counter signed by their respective Counsel.

5. In view of the above, since the dispute between the parties was amicably settled out of Court, there is no necessity to keep this case pending. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the entire proceedings in Crime No.3 of 2017, for the offences under Section 354-A of IPC., read with Section 4 of Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 and Sections 3(1) w(i), 3(2), (va) of SC/ST Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, on the file of the first respondent police is hereby quashed. The joint memo of compromise shall form a part of this order.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Encl:xerox copy of Compromise Memo dated dated.30.01.2017 Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Chinnamanoor Police Station, Theni District.

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

+1cc to M/s.A.UTHAYAKUMAR Advocate in SR. No.5775 PJL MAS.RSK.SAR1/06.02.2017/2P-4C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1089 of 2017 02.02.2017

02.02.2017