Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/16658/2016allowed

Sundaram v. The Inspectdor Of Police

2016-09-15Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.09.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.16658 of 2016 1.Sundaram 2.Mangayarkarasi : Petitioners/A2 and A3 -vs1.The State rep. By The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Pudukkottai. : R1/Complainant (Crime No.7 of 2015) 2.Aswini : R2/De-facto complainant Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in C.C.No.240 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal. For Petitioners : Mr.K.Balasundharam For 1st Respondent : Mr.S.Prabha Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side) For 2nd Respondent : Mr.S.T.Sasidharan Tamilkani

O R D E R

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records relating to the case in C.C.No.240 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pudukottai and to quash the same.

2.The first respondent registered a case in Crime No.7 of 2015 for the offence under Sections 417, 420, 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC, based on the complaint of the 2nd respondent, who was 24 year. The allegation against the accused is that the first accused, who has employed in PLA Motors Showroom at Pudukkottai along with the defacto complainant, by giving false promise of marrying her, had physical relationship with her. However, subsequently, he refused to marry her. When the de-facto complainant contacted the accused 2 and 3,who are the parents of the 1st accused, she was threatened by them.

3.Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, both the petitioners/accused A2 and A3 and the de-facto complainant are present with their respective counsel. They have filed a joint Memorandum of compromise stating that the matter has already been https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

compromised between the parties and the de-facto complainant has no objection to quash the charge sheet stating that the disputes have been settled between them.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant has no objection to quash the charge sheet filed against the accused persons.

5.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the 1st respondent. The parties identified by the Investigating Officer is also present.

6.Recording the above submission, this petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.240 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Pudukottai, is quashed. The joint compromise memo shall form part of the record.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pudukottai.

2. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Pudukkottai.

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

+2cc to Mr.K.BALASUNDHARAM, ADVOCATE IN SR.No. 52988 er JA-CK-14.10.2016-2P:6C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.16658 of 2016 15.09.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/