Veeramanikandan, v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.11.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.16085 of 2017 Veeramanikandan ... Petitioner / Sole Accused -Vs1.The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Nazerath Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

(in Crime No.63 of 2016) ...1st Respondent / Complainant 2.Muthupandi @ Muthu Pitchandi ... 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.63 of 2016 pending investigation on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Selvakumar For R1 : Mr.K.S.Duraipandian Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.K.Mathan

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in Crime No.63 of 2016 pending investigation on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same. 2.Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and the learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent.

3.The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.63 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police. The second respondent lodged a complaint, as against the petitioner, the same was registered in Crime No.63 of 2016, by the first respondent police, for the offences punishable under Section 366 IPC. Now it is stated that the petitioner and the daughter of second respondent have married and they are blessed with a child. 4.It appears that the parties, namely, the petitioner and the second respondent have settled their dispute amicably out of Court, at the intervention of friends and relatives and a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

compromise was also reached. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 21.11.2017, signed by both the parties, in the presence of their respective Counsels, is also produced before this Court. As per the terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has agreed for quashing the First Information Report in Cr.No.63 of 2016 pending on the file of the first respondent police.

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.63 of 2016 pending on the file of the first respondent police, namely, the Inspector of Police, Nazerath Police Station, Thoothukudi 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(Crl side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To Enclose herewith Xerox copy of the Joint Compromise Memo. 1.The Inspector of Police, Nazerath Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.16085 of 2017 23.11.2017 cmr JM/KK/SAR 4/06.12.2017/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/