Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/5063/2015closed

Ganesh Ramanathan, (M/29), v. State By

2015-04-17Honourable Mr Justice M.M.Sundresh3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.04.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH CRL.O.P.(MD)Nos.5063 and 3547 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 1 of 2015 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.5063 of 2015

1. Ganesh Ramanathan

2. VR.Ramanathan

3. RM.Swarnavalli ... Petitioners/Accused No.1to3 vs.

1. State by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Sivagangai, In Crime NO.25 of 2014. ... Respondent/ Complainant

2. Sindhuja Annamalai ... Respondent/ Defacto complainant PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in Crime NO.25 of 2014, pending on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan Senior Counsel for M/s AL.Gandhimathi For Respondents : Mrs.S.Prabha Government Advocate(Crl.Side) for R.1 : M/s Chettinad Legal Solutions for R.2 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3547 of 2015 Sindhuja Annamalai ... Petitioners/Defacto complainant vs.

The Inspector of Police, Sivagangai District ... Respondent/ Complainant PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondent police to take appropriate action to secure the first accused in Cr.No.25 of 2014, on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Chettinad Legal Solutions For Respondent : Mrs.S.Prabha Government Advocate(Crl.Side) COMMON ORDER Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the State and the learned Counsel appearing for other respondents.

2. Based on the reliance of joint compromise memo dated 27.03.2015, both the learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no necessity to proceed further. Both the learned Counsel submitted that the decree for divorce has been granted on 16.04.2015. The defacto complainant as well as the petitioners are also present before this Court. It is also submitted that the clauses mentioned in the joint compromise memo are also complied with.

3. Considering the same, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by proceedings further in this matter.

4. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petitions are allowed and the proceedings in Cr.No.25 of 2014, on the file of the respondent police is quashed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To (**)COMPROMISE MEMO XEROX COPIES ARE ENCLOSED HEREWITH

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Sivagangai,

2. The Inspector of Police, Sivagangai District.

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

+One cc to M/s.AL.Ganthimathi, Advocate, SR.No.19317 +One cc to M/s.Chettinad Legal Solutions, Advocate, SR.No.19330 ssl RL/ 6c- 11/5/2015 CRL.O.P.(MD)Nos.5063 and 3547 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 1 of 2015 17.04.2015