Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/1104/2017allowed

Pandiammal, v. State Rep By

2017-02-02Honourable Mr Justice G. Chockalingam2 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.1104 of 2017

1. Pandiammal

2. Kaniraja .. Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 -Vs1. State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Ammayanaickanur Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.389 of 2016)

2. Jeyapandi .. Respondents/Defacto complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No.389 of 2016 on the file of the Respondent No.1, dated 25.12.2016 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr. V.Elaiyaraja For Respondent No.1 : Mr. K.Anbarasan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Respondent No.2 : Mr. R.Venkatesan

O R D E R

This petition has been filed, to quash the First Information Report in Crime Nos.389 of 2016,on the file of the first respondent, dated 25.12.2016.

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

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners 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.389 of 2016, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC., on the file of the first respondent police and the same is pending.

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

4. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, both the petitioners 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.389 of 2016, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC., 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 (AS) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar PJL To

1. The Inspector of Police, Ammayanaickanur Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

+1CC to Mr.R.Venkatesan, Advocate Sr.No.5659 GJM/MR/SAR-II-6.3.17-2p-4C Crl.O.P.(MD).No.1104 of 2017 02.02.2017(2/2) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/