Ayyansamy, v. The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.07.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.8566 of 2017 1.Ayyansamy 2.Dharmaraj 3.Muthuselvam 4.Ashok ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 4 -Vs1.The State, Represented by its, The Sub Inspector of Police, Nazareth Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

(Crime No.109 of 2017). ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Vedhamanickam ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the entire records in relating to the FIR in crime No.109 of 2017 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioners :

Mr.S.Angappan For R1 :

Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate(Crl.side) For R2 :

Mr.S.Kathireshperumal

O R D E R

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the FIR in Cr.No.109 of 2017 pending on the file of the 1st respondent, pursuant to the amicable settlement effected between the parties.

2. It is seen that a case in Cr.No.109 of 2017 for the alleged offences under Section 506(ii) of IPC and Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Public Property [Prevention of Damage & Loss] Act, 1992 has been registered against the petitioners/A1to A4.

3. It is submitted that pursuant to the settlement entered between the parties at the intervention of elders in their respective villages, they have entered into a compromise and they have filed a joint compromise memo dated 03.07.2017 duly stating that since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement by way of compromise among themselves, the second respondent has agreed to quash FIR in Cr.No.109 of 2017 pending on the file of the first respondent Police.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners/A1 to A4 and the second respondent, appeared in person and they have submitted that they have signed in the compromise memo out of their own will and volition. The identifications of the parties, who signed in the compromise memo, were also verified by this Court through authenticated documents produced by them. Apart from that, identity of those persons are confirmed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) through the respondent police. 5.Considering the nature of allegations and in view of joint memo of compromise dated 03.07.2017, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the proceeding pending. Therefore, FIR in Cr.No.109 of 2017 pending on the file of the first respondent Police in respect of the petitioners/A1 to A4 is hereby quashed.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties. The compromise memo dated 03.07.2017, shall form part of this order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar / True Copy / Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S.) To:

Joint Compromise memo xerox copies are enclosed 1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Nazareth Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

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

+1cc to M/S.M.S.JEYA KARATHIK, Advocate SR.No.64080 CM/gsp MAS/SKN-RSK/SAR1:14.07.2017:2P-4C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.8566 of 2017 07.07.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/