Suresh v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:28.06.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM CRL.O.P (MD) No.11471 of 2022

1. Suresh,

2. Ajith Kumar,

3. Selvam, : Petitioners Vs

1. State represented by its The Inspector of Police, Andipatti Police Station, Theni District.

Crime No.160/2022.

2. Udhayakumar, : Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in Crime No. 160 of 2022 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Andipatti Police Station, Theni District and quash the same as against the petitioners. 1/5

For Petitioners : M/s.Jegadeesh Pandian M, For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.B.Viswanathan

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.160 of 2022 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Andipatti Police Station, Theni District 2.The case of the prosecution is that due to civil dispute, the defacto the petitioners caused injury to the defacto complainant and threatened with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

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 2/5

which have been signed by the petitioners and the second respondent and also by their respective counsel. The petitioners and the second respondent were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by Mrs.K.Savariammanl Devi, SI of Police, Aundipatty Police Station, Theni District. This 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 civil 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), 324, 307, 379, 506(2) and 109 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.

proceedings in Crime No.160 of 2022 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.160 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed insofar as the petitioners alone and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order. 28.06.2022 Internet:Yes./No Index:Yes/no lr To 1.The Inspector of Police, Andipatti Police Station, Theni District.

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

4/5

V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

lr ORDER IN CRL.O.P (MD) No.11471 of 2022 28.06.2022 5/5