Arunkumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Arunkumar

2. Sanjai

3. Anbarasan

4. Murugan

5. Arulselvan Alias Selvan

6. Mathankumar

7. Arulselvi

8. Esakkiammal ... Petitioners Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

Crime No. 180 of 2023.

2. Rakshana ... Respondents 1/5

PRAYER: Criminal Original petitions have been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records in C.C. No. 61 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District and Quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioner : Mr. K.Ganesamoorthi, For R1 : Mr.M.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.Mohideen Basha

O R D E R

This petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No.61 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No. 180 of 2023 and quash the same.

2. According to the petitioners, based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the police has registered FIR in Cr.No. 180 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 379 and 2/5

506(ii) of IPC of IPC.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel on both sides represented that during pendency of the case in C.C.No.61 of 2024, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and to that effect, they have entered into a compromise and the same was filed before this Court. They would further submit that the first petitioner also lodged a complaint against the second respondent's family members, for which, a case in Crime No.179 of 2023 was registered and after investigation, final report was filed and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.315 of 2024, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamudram. In that counter case also, the parties were reached compromise.

4. Today, the defacto-complainant and all the accused are present and the Court enquired about the terms of compromise. The defactocomplainant represented that they entered into a compromise. A compromise memo, dated 06.03.2025 signed by the parties and their respective counsels, is also filed before this Court. 3/5

5. This Court has perused the terms of the compromise memo.

6. Considering the nature of the offences and the parties have also entered into a compromise, it is appropriate to allow this petition.

7. Recording the said compromise memo, this petition is allowed and C.C.No.61 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District is quashed. 20.03.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District 2.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Ambasamudram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

LR 20.03.2025 5/5