Kaniraj v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.11.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15940 of 2017 1.Kaniraj 2.Raguramsundar ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 -Vs1.The State represented by The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai District.

...1st Respondent / Complainant 2.Ramanathan ...2nd Respondent / De-facto complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records connected with the case in Crime No.69 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Alagumani For R1 : Mr.K.S.Durai Pandian Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.L.M.Vijai Boominathan ***

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the case in Crime No.69 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent. 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 the Accused No.1 and 2 in the criminal case in Cr.No.69 of 2017, pending on the file of the first respondent police. On the basis of the complaint given by the second respondent, a case was registered by the first respondent police, as against the petitioners, in Crime No.69 of 2017, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 448, 294(b) and 506(i) IPC. 4.It appears that the parties, namely, the petitioners and the second respondent have settled their dispute amicably out of Court, at the intervention of elders and relatives and a compromise was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

also reached. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 18.11.2017, signed by both the parties, in the presence of their respective Counsels, is also produced before this Court. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the second respondent has agreed for quashing the criminal complaint in Crime No.69 of 2017, pending on the file of the first respondent police. It is also stated in the Joint Compromise Memo that the complaint was lodged purely by mistake of identity. 5.Today, the parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their own free will and 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.In view of 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.69 of 2017, on the file of the first respondent police, namely, the Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station, 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(RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai District.

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

+3cc to Mr.R.ALAGUMANI Advocate in SR. No. 88801 CMR JS/KK/SAR.1/12.12.2017/2P-6C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15940 of 2017 22.11.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/