Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/7111/2016allowed

Rajakannan v. The Inspector Of Police

2016-10-19Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.10.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM Crl.O.P(MD)No.7111 of 2016 1.Rajakannan 2.Pitchai 3.Vellammal 4.Ayyammal @ Ganthimathi 5.Marimuthu ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 5 -vs1. The State through the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Nilakottai.

In Crime No.13 of 2015.

... 1st Respondent/Complainant

2. R.Menaha Gowery ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto complainant Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned F.I.R in Crime No.13 of 2015 on the file of the All Women Police Station, Nilakkottai Taluk, Dindigul District, dated 02.07.2015 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Shankar Ganesh For R - 1 : Mr.P.Kannithevan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R - 2 : Mr.A.Ananda Raj

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records pertaining to the impugned F.I.R in Crime No.13 of 2015 on the file of the All Women Police Station, Nilakkottai Taluk, Dindigul District, dated 02.07.2015 and quash the same. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. 3.Based on the complaint given by the second respondent/defacto complainant, a case has been registered against the petitioners in Crime No.13 of 2015 for the offences under Sections 147, 498(A), 307, 294(b) IPC and r/w 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on the file of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the first respondent. The said F.I.R. is challenged before this Court.

4.When the matter is called today, both the petitioners as well as the second respondent are present before this Court and they categorically made a statement that the dispute between them have been settled amicably. They also filed a joint compromise memo, dated 13.04.2016 duly signed by both parties and counter signed by their respective Counsel. The second respondent has no objection to quash the F.I.R.

5.In view of the statements made by the parties and the joint compromise memo filed by them, no fruitful purpose will be achieved to proceed further in this matter.

6.In view of that, the impugned F.I.R. in Crime No.13 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent is hereby quashed and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Nilakottai.

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

+ 1 CC TO Mr.R.SHANKAR GANESH, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 61497 PS TE/SS-2/SAR-I : 25/10/2016 : 2P/4C (IT) Crl.O.P(MD)No.7111 of 2016 19.10.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/