Pandiyan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.10.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14535 of 2017 1.Pandiyan 2.Mahalakshmi 3.Sapanimuthu 4.Sapani ... Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 to 4 -Vs1.State represented by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Samayanallur, Madurai District.

(In Crime No.46 of 2016) ...1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Jeeva Angel ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in Crime No.46 of 2016 pending on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioners :Mr.P.T.Ramesh Raja For R-1 :Mr.K.S.Durapandian Additional Public Prosecutor For R-2 :Mr.R.Ponkarthikeyan ****

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in Crime No.46 of 2016 pending on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.

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 No.1 to 4 in Crime No.46 of 2016. Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, a case was registered by the first respondent in Cr.No.46 of 2016, against the petitioners, for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) IPC.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.It appears that the petitioners and the second respondent have settled their dispute amicably at the intervention of elders

and well wishers. The petitioner and the second respondent are also living together as husband and wife, after the settlement. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 25.10.2017, signed by both parties, in the presence of their respective counsel, is also produced before this Court. As per the terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has no objection for quashing the First Information Report in Cr.No.46 of 2016.

5.Today, 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.46 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent, namely, the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Samayanallur, Madurai District, is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.

7.Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To Encl:Xerox copy of Compromise memo 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Samayanallur,Madurai District.

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

+1cc to M/S.P.T.RAMESH RAJA, Advocate SR.No.84265 +1cc to M/S.R.PON KARTHIKEYAN, Advocate SR.No.84264 cmr MAS/SV-MMS/SAR2:13.11.2017:2P-5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14535 of 2017 30.10.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/