Sakkammal v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

Crl.O.P(MD)No.4955 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.01.2022 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P(MD)No.4955 of 2020 1.Sakkammal 2.Kutta Perumal @ Perumal ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 Vs.

1.The State represented by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vilathikulam Division, Thoothukudi District.

(Crime No.21 of 2016) ... Respondent/Complainant 2.Muthulakshmi ... 2nd Respondent/ De-facto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the S.C.No.38 of 2017 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli and quash the proceedings as against the petitioners herein. For Petitioners : Mr.J.David Ganesan For Respondents : Mr.RMS.Sethuraman Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 Mr.A.Sankara Rama Subramanian for R2

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking quashment of S.C.No.38 of 2017 pending on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli. The petitioner is facing a charge for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act and Section 3(1) (r) (S) 3(2), V(a) SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act.

2. When the matter came up for hearing today, the defacto complainant as well as the accused person are present before the Court along with their respective counsels and they were identified by concerned police officials. The defacto complainant received https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P(MD)No.4955 of 2020 Rs.23,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three Thousand only) as compensation from the Government. So, on that ground, she was directed to re-deposit the amount. So, on that ground, the matter is listed today.

3. Today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the entire amount which was received by the defacto complainant was re-deposited in the Government Account and a challan was also produced. The matter compromised between the parties was also cancelled and returned to the re-deposit in the Government Account. The facts of the case are not in issue. No purpose is going to serve by directing the accused person to undergo the trial process. The de-facto complainant has also submitted that no more issue is existing between them.

4. In view of the above said compromise, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and now S.C.No.38 of 2017 which is pending on the II Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, stands quashed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-I) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) btr/gbg Note :In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To Enclose copy of Joint Compromise Memo.

1.The II Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli.

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vilathikulam Division, Thoothukudi District.

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

Crl.O.P(MD)No.4955 of 2020 11.01.2022 RK(09/02/2022) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2