Latha v. The Inspector Of Police
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11581 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11581 of 2021 1.Latha 2.Seetha 3.Raja 4.Gowtham 5.Gowri Raja ... Petitioners/A2 to A6 Vs.
1.State represented by the Inspector of Police, Palamedu Police Station, Madurai District.
(In Crime No.110 of 2015) ...1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Thirumalai ...2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant 3.Puliammal 4.Vellaisamy
...Respondents 3 & 4/Injured Persons
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the entire records and quash the entire proceedings in Crime No.110 of 2015 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Palamedu Police Station, Madurai District against these petitioners.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Aravindraj For R1 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 to R4 : Mr.K.Karthik
O R D E R
This petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No. 110 of 2015 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Palamedu Police Station, Madurai District, the first respondent herein.
2. The case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 IPC and Section 4 of Tamilnaduu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act on the basis of the complaint given by the second respondent.
3. The crux of the complaint is that the defacto complainant's nephew and the daughter of the first accused in this case loved each https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11581 of 2021 other and on 05.08.2015 they have eloped. Hence, the petitioners/accused went to the defacto complainant's house and damaged the house and also attacked the defacto complainant's sister and her husband and caused simple injuries. Hence, the case has been registered for the aforesaid offences.
4. When the matter is taken for hearing, the petitioners/A2 to A6 and the respondents 2 to 4 are present before the Office of the Additional Public Prosecutor and appeared through video conference. Their respective counsel are also present before this Court through video conference. The identity of the parties are verified by the respective counsel and the police. When this Court enquired with the parties, it is seen that they have compromised the dispute. The respondents 2 to 4 are willing to quash the case in Crime No. 110 of 2015. In view of the compromise entered into between the parties, no purpose would be served in keeping proceedings pending.
5. Recording the joint compromise memo dated 16.08.2021, the First Information Report in Crime No. 110 of 2015 on the file of the first first respondent police is hereby quashed so far as the petitioners are concerned. The joint compromise memo dated 16.08.2021 shall form part of this order.
6. In fine, this petition is allowed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (W) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) CM 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.
Enclosed The Joint Compromise memo To 1.The Inspector of Police, Palamedu Police Station,Madurai District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11581 of 2021 17.08.2021 RD(6.09.2021) 2P 3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2