Ukkirapandi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.10.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14265 of 2017 1.Ukkirapandi 2.Muthupandi ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 -Vs1. The Inspector of Police, Kovilankulam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
(In Crime No.73 of 2017) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant
2. Lakshmi ...2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the case in Cr.No.73 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent / complainant and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Venkateswaran For R-1 : Mr.K.S.Duraipandian Additional Public Prosecutor For R-2 : Mr.K.Sabbani Karpura Jothi
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Cr.No.73 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent / complainant.
2.Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and the learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent.
3.The petitioners are Accused Nos.1 to 2 in Cr.No.73 of 2017. Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, against the petitioners, the case was registered in Crime No.73 of 2017, on the file of the first respondent police, for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) IPC r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.It appears that the on the advice of well wishers and elders, the parties have entered into compromise and a Joint
Compromise Memo, dated 23.10.2017, signed by both parties, in the presence of their respective counsel, is also filed. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, it is stated that due to the intervention of elders and well well wishers on both sides and for purchasing peace, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has agreed to quash the First Information Report in Cr.No.73 of 2017. 5.The parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their own will and free 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 Additional Public Prosecutor 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 the First Information Report in Cr.No.73 of 2017 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kovilankulam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District, is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order. Accordingly, the Criminal Original petition is allowed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl.: Xerox Copy of Compromise Memo To
1. The Inspector of Police, Kovilankulam Police Station Ramanathapuram District.
2. The Additional Public prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+ 1 CC TO MR.R.Venkateswaran, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 84006 cmr MK/MR KKR/SAR-3/07.11.2017/2P/4C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14265 of 2017 26.10.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/