Tamilarasan v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.06.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10749 of 2023

1. Tamilarasan

2. Kumaresan

3. Govintharaj ... Petitioners/ Accused No.6 to 8 Vs.

1.State Represented by The Sub-Inspector of Police, Rameswaram Town Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

... Respondent/ Complainant

2. Shahid Afridi ... Respondent/ Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records pertaining to F.I.R in Crime No.252/2019 U/s.147, 148, 294(b), 452, 324, 307 of IPC, r/w 3 of Tamilnadu Pubic Property (Prevents of Damage & Loss) Act, 1992 on 01.12.2019 on the file of the 1st Respondent Police and quash the same as illegal a against the petitioner/ accused.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.BalaMurugapandi For 1st Respondent : Mr.S.Manikandan Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For 2nd respondent : Mr.J. Venkatesan * * * * * 1/5

O RDER This petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned FIR in Crime No.252 of 2019 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.252 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 452, 324, 307 IPC r/w. Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevents of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992. 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 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 2/5

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 22.06.2023, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and inclined to quash all further proceedings in Crime No.252 of 2019 pending on the file of the 1st respondent police in respect of these petitioners. 6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in Crime No.252 of 2019, pending on the file of the 1st respondent police is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioners. The compromise memo is recorded and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order.

23.06.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No trp 3/5

To

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Rameswaram Town Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

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

4/5

G.ILANGOVAN. J.

trp Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10749 of 2023 23.06.2023 5/5