M. Suresh v. The Special Sub Inspector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.12.2017 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR CRL.O.P.(MD)No.20056 of 2016 and CRL.M.P.(MD)No.10058 of 2016& CRL.M.P.(MD)No.5090 of 2017

1. M.Suresh

2. Marimuthu

3. Pandiammal ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 Vs.

1.The State represented by, The Special Sub Inspector, All Women Police Station, Tallakulam, Madurai.

(Crime No.3 of 2016) ... Respondent /Complainant

2. M.Kayal Vizhi ... Respondent/ De-facto Complainant PRAYER:Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.182 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Madurai and to quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.C.Gangai Amaran For R-1 : Mr.K.S.Durai Pandiyan, Additional Public Prosecutor.

For R-2 : Mr.T.Antony Arul Raj

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition is filed for quashing the Charge Sheet in C.C.No.182 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Madurai.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

3.The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.182 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Madurai. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the second respondent/de-facto complainant, a case was registered in Crime No.3 of 2016, dated 18.02.2016, for the alleged offences under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b), 506(i) of I.P.C., and Section 4 of T.N.P.W.H. Act.

4. After filing Charge Sheet, the case was taken on file in C.C.No.182 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Madurai.

5. 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. It is stated that the parties also have entered into a compromise. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 27.11.2017, signed by the petitioners and the de-facto complainant in the presence of their respective counsels is produced before this Court. As per the Joint Compromise memo, the defacto complainant has agreed for quashing the Charge Sheet in C.C.No.182 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Madurai.

6. The parties, namely, the petitioners and the second respondent 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.

7. Having regard to 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, on the basis of the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties, the Criminal Original petition is allowed and the Charge Sheet in C.C.No.182 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Madurai, is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To (Encl. Xerox copy of Joint Compromise Memo)

1. The Special Sub Inspector, All Women Police Station, Tallakulam, Madurai.

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

+1cc to M/S.T.ANTONY ARULRAJ, Advocate SR.No.92886. +1cc to M/S.VEERA ASSOCIATES, Advocate SR.No.93033. CRL OP(MD)No.20056 of 2016 and CRL.M.P.(MD)No.10058 of 2016& CRL.M.P.(MD)No.5090 of 2017 14.12.2017 pmu SDS/SKN:RSK/SAR 3/10.01.2018/3P/5C