Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/6010/2017ordered

K.Mahendran v. The Inspector Of Police

2017-05-17Honourable Mr Justice M.V. Muralidaran2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.05.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN Crl.O.P(MD)No.6010 of 2017 1.K.Mahendran 2.Thangavelu 3.Muthu @ Muthuswamy 4.Krishnasamy 5.Indrani ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 5 -VsState represented by 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tallakulam, Madurai.

(Crime No.30 of 2015) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.C.Rashmi Priyankhaa ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.111 of 2016 on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Magistrate Level, Madurai, which pertains to the Crime No.30 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent Police Station.

For Petitioners : Mr.P.Suresh Kumar For R - 1 : Mr.A.P.Balasubramani, Government Advocate For R - 2 : Mr.N.Chandrasekaran

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.111 of 2016 on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Magistrate Level, Madurai, which pertains to Crime No.30 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent. 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and perused the materials available on record. 3.Based on the complaint given by the second respondent/ de-facto complainant, the First Information Report has been registered against the petitioners and after investigation final report has been filed in C.C.No.111 of 2016 on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Magistrate Level, Madurai, under Sections 498(A), 406 and 506(i) IPC. Challenging the said charge https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

sheet, the petitioners have come before this Court. 4.Pending disposal of the above matter, both the second respondent as well as the petitioners compromised the matter and filed a memo of compromise duly signed by the parties. 5.Both the parties are present before this Court and submitted that the matter has been settled between them at the intervention of the elders of the family. In view of the compromise memo filed by the parties, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be achieved by further proceeding in the matter. 6.In view of that, the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.111 of 2016 on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Magistrate Level, Madurai, are quashed and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

Sd/- Vacation officer, /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registsrar To 1.The Additional Mahila Judge, Magistrate Level, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tallakulam, Madurai.

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

+1cc to Mr.R.Karunanidhi,Advocate,SR.56686 +1cc to Mr.N.Chandra Sekar,Advocate,SR.57017 Crl.O.P(MD)No.6010 of 2017 17.05.2017 PS KK/RSK/SAR3/19.05.2017-2P-6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/