Ravi Sankar v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.07.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR CRL.OP.(MD)No.9095 of 2017 1.Ravi sankar 2.Malar kodi ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2 Vs.

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Golden Rock, Trichy City.

... 1st Respondent/Complainant

2. Maheshwari ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying this Court to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No. 1 of 2017, on the file of the first respondent/police and to quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Jameel Arasu For Respondent-1 : Mr.K.Anbarasan Govt. Advocate(Crl.Side) For Respondent-2 : Mr.A.Joel Paul Antony

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying this Court to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No. 1 of 2017, on the file of the first respondent-police and to quash the same.

2.Heard the submissions of Mr.B.Jameel Arasu, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Mr.K.Anbarasan, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side)appearing for the first respondent/State and Mr.A.Joel Paul Antony, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and perused the materials placed before this Court including the joint compromise memo filed by both the parties.

3.Based on the complaint given by the second respondent namely, the de-facto complainant, a case was registered against the petitioners for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 417 and 506 (ii) of IPC r/w Section 4 of Women Harassment Act and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The case was registered in Crime No. 1 of 2017.

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

4.It is stated that subsequent to the complaint, the petitioners namely A1 and A2 shown in the FIR and the second respondent/de-facto complainant have entered into a compromise on the basis of the advise and guidance of the well-wishers and other family members of both the parties. Pursuant to the compromise, a joint compromise memo, dated 10.07.2017 was signed by the petitioners and the second respondent/de-facto complainant in the presence of their respective counsels, who are also the signatories to the joint compromise memo. In the joint compromise memo, it is stated that both parties are not interested to prosecute the case against each other in future and the second respondent/de-facto complainant has agreed to quash the FIR in Cr.No.1 of 2017. 5.

The parties appear before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have settled their dispute between them outside the Court amicably on their free will and own volition. The identity of the parties, who have signed the compromise memo, are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced before this Court by the parties concerned. Their identity was also confirmed by the learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side), through the first respondent/ police.

6.In the said circumstances, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served in keeping this matter pending and this quash petition can be allowed based on the compromise memo. 7.Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the FIR in Cr.No.1 of 2017, on the file of the first respondent/Police is quashed in so far as the petitioners are concerned. The joint compromise memo, dated 10.07.2017 shall form part of this order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl.: Xerox copy of Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Golden Rock, Trichy City.

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

+ 3 CC TO Mr.B.JAMEEL ARASU, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 65965 GNS/VSN TE/MR-KKR/SAR-I : 01/08/2017 : 2P/6C ORDER MADE IN CRL.OP.(MD)No.9095 of 2017 17.07.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/