Anand v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.08.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11006 of 2017 Anand ... Petitioner/Sole Accused -Vs1. State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Lalgudi Police Station, Trichy District.

(Crime No.375 of 2016) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant

2. Rajasekar ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for records pertaining to the FIR in Crime No.375 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar For R-1 : Mr.K.Anbarasan, Government Advocate(Crl.side).

For R-2 : Mr.D.Venkatesh

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition is filed to call for records pertaining to the FIR in Crime No.375 of 2016 on the file of the first 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 the complaint given by the second respondent/de-facto complainant, a case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.375 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 506 (ii) and 379 of IPC. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.It appears that at the advise of the elders and friends, the

petitioner and the second respondent have agreed to compromise the matter out of Court. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 10.08.2017, is also filed. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has given his consent to quash the entire proceedings in Cr.No.375 of 2016, on the file of the first respondent police.

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 identities of the parties are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this Court. The identities of the parties are also confirmed by the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) through the first respondent police.

6.Having regard to the agreement made between the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. As per the Compromise Memo signed by the parties, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has agreed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. Hence the First Information Report in Cr.No.375 of 2016 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. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl.: Xerox copy of Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, Lalgudi Police Station, Trichy District.

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

+ 1 CC TO Mr.T.LENIN KUMAR, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 73789 + 1 CC TO Mr. D.VENKATESH, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 73788 IS/CMR TE/SKN-RSK/SAR-II : 20/09/2017 : 2P/5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11006 of 2017 22.08.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/