Murali v. The Inspector Of Police(Crime
CRL.O.P.(MD).No.1986 of 2019 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR CRL.O.P.(MD).No.1986 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.1054 of 2019 1.Murali 2.Uppalamangaraju : Petitioners/A1 and A2 Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Sattur Taluk Police Station, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.
Crime No.292 of 2018 : Respondent/Complainant 2.K.Sangaralingam : Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records pertaining to the Crime No.292 of 2018 pending investigation on the file of the first respondent/complainant and quash the same as illegal. For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam For Respondents : Mr.R.Sivakumar, Government Advocate (Criminal Side), for R1.
: Mr.H.Arumugam, for R2.
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking orders to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No.292 of 2018 pending investigation on the file of the first respondent/complainant and quash the same as illegal. 2.When the matter is taken up for hearing today (17.12.2021), the petitioners as well as the second respondent are present before this Court and also filed a joint compromise memo. On enquiry, before this Court both parties have accepted the terms of the compromise. Hence, the compromise memo is recorded. 3.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the nature of the charges levelled against the petitioners and also taking note of the fact that the parties have entered into compromise and the joint compromise memo is recorded, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served in keeping the case pending. Consequently, all the proceedings in Crime No.292 of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2
CRL.O.P.(MD).No.1986 of 2019 2018 are ordered to be quashed. In the terms and conditions, it has been stated that the seized goods are in the custody of the respondent Police. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the second respondent would submit that the respondent Police already produced the property before the concerned court and the same was remanded and available in the custody of the Court.
4. In the compromise memo filed by both parties, they have agreed that the petitioner can get back the seized goods i.e., the match sticks and the containers (white inner box) and with a condition that the labels and rappers covered with match boxes and the bundle boxes, etc., containing the trademark shall be destroyed at the cost of the petitioners and in the presence of the second respondent.
5.Since the property is in the custody of the jurisdictional Court, the parties are directed to approach the Court and file necessary application and on filing such application, the learned Judge is directed to take note of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass orders in accordance with law. 6.Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) das Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To 1.The Inspector of Police, Sattur Taluk Police Station, Sattur, Virudhunagar District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madrash High Court, Madurai.
+1 CC to M/s.H.ARUMUGAM, Advocate ( SR-39658[F] dated 20/12/2021 ) CRL.O.P.(MD).No.1986 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.1054 of 2019 17.12.2021 MGJ(30.12.2021) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2