Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/9576/2017allowed

P.Ramkumar, v. The Inspector Of Police,

2017-08-02Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.08.2017

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.9576 of 2017 P.Ramkumar ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 -Vs1. State, Rep. by Inspector of Police, Oomatchikulam Police Station, Madurai District.

(In Crime No.844 of 2013) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant

2. Vijayasankar ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to Crime No.844 of 2013, dated 19.11.2013, on the file of the Inspector of Police, Oomatchikulam Police Station, Madurai District and quash the same.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Mahendrapathy For R-1 :

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

For R-2 :

Mr.D.Ramesh Kumar

O R D E R

This Criminal Original petition is filed for quashing the criminal proceedings in Crime No.844 of 2013, dated 19.11.2013, on the file of the Inspector of Police, Oomatchikulam Police Station, Madurai District.

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

3. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the second respondent, a case was registered by the first respondent police in Crime No.844 of 2013, dated 19.11.2013, for the offence under https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Sections 341, 294(b), 323 and 506(i) of I.P.C.

4. Pursuant to the complaint, it appears that the parties, namely, the petitioner and the second respondent/defacto complainant who are the close relatives, amicably settled their dispute out of Court, on the advise of the family members and elders. They have also entered into a Joint Compromise Memo, dated 30.06.2017. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the defacto complainant, agreed for quashing the criminal proceedings in Crime No.844 of 2013.

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

6. 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 criminal proceedings in Crime No.844 of 2013 on the file of the first respondent herein is quashed in respect of the petitioner herein. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl.: Xerox copy of Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, Oomatchikulam Police Station, Madurai District.

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

+ 2 CC TO Mr.S.MAHENDRAPATHY, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 70502 PMU TE/KK/SAR-IV : 29/08/2017 : 2P/5C Crl.O.P.(MD) No.9576 of 2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 02.08.2017