Sreethar v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.04.2024 CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Sreethar, ... Petitioner Vs
1. The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Suchindram Police Station, Kanniyakumari District.
Crime No. 249 of 2023.
2. Selvi, ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the impugned FIR in Crime No. 249 of 2023 dated 02.09.2023 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajeshkumar For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate(Crl.side) For R2 : Mr.R.Sidharthan 1/6
ORDER
The petitioner is an accused in Crime No.249 of 2023 on the file of the first respondent Police Station, which was registered for the offence under Sections 294(b), 427, and 506(1) IPC and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. He has filed this petition to quash the proceedings pending against him.
2.The petitioner / accused and the defacto complainant are relatives. The case of the prosecution is that due to matrimonial dispute, the accused harassed the defacto complainant's daughter and demanded dowry. Hence the Complaint.
3.The Defacto complainant and the accused are present before this Court and they submitted that on the intervention of the elders, they have amicably resolved their issue. A compromise memo, dated 24.02.2024 signed by both the parties, is also filed before this Court. 4.Before entertaining this application on the ground of compromise, this court has also directed the investigation officer in Crime No.249 of 2023 to personally verify with the defacto complainant and to ascertain whether the compromise is voluntary one, without any threat or coercion. The 2/6
investigating officer, after due verification, has filed a report as under: This is to certify that, as directed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3397 of 2024, I personally verified the defacto complainant in Cr.No.249 of 2023, for the offence under Sections 2949b), 427, and 506(1) IPC and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 and ascertained that the compromise arrived between the accused and the defacto complainant/victims in the above case is voluntary, without any threat or coercion.
I further clarify that there are no other victims in this case, except the victims appeared before this Hon'ble Court today.
5.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath, reported in 2017 9 SCC 641 and in case of The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10, has given sufficient guidelines that must be taken into consideration by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to quash non-compoundable offences. One very important test that has been laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine if the crime in question is purely individual in nature or a crime against the society with overriding public interest. It has been repeatedly cautioned that offences against the society with overriding public interest even if it gets settled 3/6
between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court. 6.The parties are present. This Court has verified the parties with their Aadhaar cards and also verified the present status. The defacto complainant has expressed her willingness to solve the issue. 7.In the present case, the offences in question are purely individual/personal in nature. It involves the petitioner and the second respondent only. The defacto complainant herself has submitted that she does not want to prosecute the case any further. Even otherwise, quashing this case, will not affect any overriding public interest in this case. Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the case in Crime No.249 of 2023 pending, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
On the other hand, keeping the proceedings pending will only swell the mental agony of the parties. 8.In view of the above development and following the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases referred supra, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings though certain offences are noncompoundable, in order to avoid further conflict between the parties.
9.Accordingly, by recording the joint compromise memo, dated 24.02.2024, this criminal original petition is allowed and the case in Crime No.249 of 2023 pending on the file of the first respondent is hereby quashed. The joint compromise memo, dated 24.02.2024, shall form part and parcel of this order.
08.04.2024 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes LR 5/6
B.PUGALENDHI,J LR To
1. The Inspector of Police, Suchindram Police Station, Kanniyakumari District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
08.04.2024 6/6