Karuppasamy v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:10.11.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.21019 of 2016 Karuppasamy .. Petitioner/sole accused -vs1.The State rep. By The Inspector of Police, Thiruthangal Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

In Crime No.505 of 2016 ..1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Ranjithkumar ..2nd respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records pertaining to F.I.R in Crime No.505 of 2016 on the file of the 1st respondent police, dated 12.09.2016 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Jeyaprakash For R-1 : Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate Crl.Side For R-2 : M/s.S.Muthukumar

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the F.I.R in Crime No.505 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police.

2. It is seen that a case has been registered against the petitioner in Crime No.505 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police for the offence under Sections 294(b) and 307 of I.P.C.

3. When the matter came up for hearing on 07.11.2016, the petitioner and the second respondent, appeared in person and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) through the respondent police and the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the matter is now compromised out of the court and the petitioner is willing to donate a sum of Rs.5,000/- to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Rojavanam Old Age Home, Ulaganeri, Madurai and the defacto complainant had no objection to quash the F.I.R., and in view of the same, the petitioners were permitted to pay the said amount to the Old Age Home and the matter was directed to be listed for reporting compliance.

4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, it is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as agreed by the petitioner a sum of Rs.5,000/- has been paid to Rojavanam Old Age Home, Ulaganeri, Madurai and cost-memo has been filed to that effect. Further, joint compromise memo, dated 03.11.2016 signed by both parties and their respective counsel has also been produced before this Court.

5. This Court is of the view that since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement by way of compromise among themselves and the defacto complainant has no objection to quash the F.I.R in Crime No.505 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the F.I.R in Crime No.505 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police, is hereby quashed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Writ) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Pm To 1.The Inspector of Police, Thiruthangal Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

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

+1cc to Mr.C.Jeyaprakash Advocate Sr.No. 67517 JAM/28.11.16/ck/2p-4c Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21019 of 2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10.11.2016