Vignesh v. The Inspector Of Police

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10947 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.06.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10947 of 2022 Vignesh

...Petitioner/Sole Accused

Vs.

1.State Through the Inspector of Police, Kamuthi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

(Crime No.447 of 2020) ...1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Ponnuchamy ...2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying this Court to call for the records in Crime No.447 of 2020 on the file of the 1st respondent Police and to quash the same against the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Ms.P. Jessi Jeeva Priya For 1st Respondent : Mr.M. Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For 2nd respondent : M/s. P.Shanmugavel Priya

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.447 of 2020, on the file of the first respondent police.

2. On the complaint given by the 2nd respondent a case has been registered in Crime No. 447 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 294(b) and 323 IPC as against the petitioner herein and the petitioner herein has also given a complaint and the same has been registered in Crime No. 448 of 2020 for the similar offences. This is case of case and counter case.

3.The case is still at the stage of investigation. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves. 4.A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court which have been signed by the petitioner and the second respondent and also by their respective counsel. The petitioner and the second respondent were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by Mr.G. Sankar, HC, Kamuthi Police Station. This https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10947 of 2022 Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. 5.In the instant case, the dispute is of personal in nature and the parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has to power to quash the complaint for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 332, 506(i) IPC. 6.The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Panjab and another reported in (2012)10 SCC 303 and Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath) reported in (2017)9 SCC 641 were taken into consideration. 7.In the light of the guidelines issued in the above said Judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings in Crime No.447 of 2020 pending before the first respondent police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.

8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.447 of 2020 on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed insofar as the petitioner alone and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) trp ENCL:Xerox Copy of Joint Compromise Memo To

1. The Inspector of Police, Kamuthi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

+1 CC to M/s.P. JESSI JEEVA PRIYA, Advocate ( SR-26803[F] dated 20/06/2022 ) Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10947 of 2022 20.06.2022 NSN(CO) GC(30.06.2022) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2