Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/11585/2021allowed

Syed Sulthan v. The Inspector Of Police

2021-09-29Honourable Mr Justice G.Ilangovan2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11585 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.09.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11585 of 2021 1.Syed Sulthan 2.Maha Abubakkar @ Abubukkar Sithik 3.Varusai Mohamed ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 3 Vs.

1.The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Devipattinam Police Station, Devipattinam, Ramanathapuram District (Crime No.42 of 2021) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Noorul Haq @ Noorul Haque ... 2nd Respondents/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No.42 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent herein and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.B.Arun For R1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.S.Pradeep

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking quashment of the impugned FIR in Crime No.42 of 2021 on the file of the 1st respondent police. 2.The contention of the petitioners is that based on the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.42 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 324 and 506(2) of IPC against the petitioners.

3.The further contention of the petitioners is that they compromised the issue with the 2nd respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioners and the 2nd respondent and also by their respective counsels.

4.The petitioners and the 2nd respondent appeared through video conference from the Office of the learned Government Advocate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11585 of 2021 (Crl.Side) before this Court along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They were also identified by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and the Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Hence, the Compromise Memo is recorded. 5.Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners and also in view of the joint compromise memo, dated 15.07.2021, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending. Hence, all further proceedings in Crime No.42 of 2021 pending on the file of the 1st respondent police is quashed and the compromise memo is recorded.

6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in Crime No.42 of 2021, pending on the file of the 1st respondent police is hereby quashed and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS I) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) mm 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 (*) Enclosed herewith copy of the Joint Compromise Memo 1.The Inspector of Police, Devipattinam Police Station, Devipattinam Ramanathapuram District 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1 CC to M/s.B.ARUN, Advocate ( SR-30802[F] dated 30/09/2021 ) Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11585 of 2021 29.09.2021 NSN(CO)/RS (13.10.2021) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2