← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9340/2017allowed

Shanmuga Velu v. The Inspector Of Police

2017-07-19Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.07.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.9340 of 2017 1.Shanmuga Velu 2.Selvi 3.Ramu 4.Rakkammal ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 -Vs1.The State rep by its, The Inspector of Police, Chatrakudi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. ... 1st Respondent /Complainant

2. Anitha ... 2nd Respondent /Defacto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the entire records in relating to the F.I.R. in Crime No.43 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioners :

Mr.M.S.Jeykarthik For R-1 :

Mr.K.Anbarasan, Government Advocate(Crl.side).

For R-2 :

Mr.A.Karthick Kumar ***

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition is filed for quashing the First Information Report in Crime No.43 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

3. The second respondent is the daughter-in-law of the petitioners 3 and 4 and the first petitioner is the brother-in-law of the second respondent and the second petitioner is the wife of the first petitioner. It is seen that on the basis of the complaint received from the second respondent/decfacto https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

complainant, the first respondent police registered a case against the petitioners in Crime No.43 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) of I.P.C., r/w Section 4 of Woman Harassment Act.

4. Pursuant to the registration of the case, the petitioners namely, accused Nos.1 to 4 and the second respondent/defacto complainant have entered into a compromise, on the advise of the family members and elders. The dispute between the parties were settled amicably out of Court. The petitioners and the second respondent have entered into a compromise and agreed that the criminal case in Crime No.43 of 2017 can be quashed.

5. The parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed in the Joint Compromise Memo, dated 19.04.2017 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 Government Advocate(Criminal side) through the first respondent police.

6. Having regard to the specific term agreed by the defacto complainant that she has no objection for quashing the First Information Report, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence, the Criminal Original petition is allowed on the basis of the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties and the First Information Report in Crime No.43 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector of Police, Chatrakudi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

+1cc to Mr.M.S.JEYAKARTHIK Advocate in SR. No.66720 CP/CMU JS/MR.KKR/SAR.3/4.8.2017/2P-4C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.9340 of 2017 19.07.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/