Ramasamy v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.06.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Ramasamy ... PetitionerSole /Accused Vs.

1.State rep. by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Chinnakovilankulam Police Station, Tenkasi District.

(Cr.No.40 of 2023) ... Respondent/Complainants 3.Balamurugan ... 3rd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records Pertaining ti the FIR in Crime No.40 of 2023 on the file of the 2nd Respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Maharajan For Respondents : Mr.B.Nambiselvan for R1 and R2 Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.N.Saravanan for R3 1/5

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned FIR in Crime No.40 of 2023 on the file of the 2nd respondent police. 2.The contention of the petitioner is that based on the complaint lodged by the 3rd respondent, the 1st respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.40 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(i) of IPC, Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, against the petitioner.

3.The further contention of the petitioner is that they compromised the issue with the 3rd respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioner and the 3rd respondent and also by their respective counsels. 4.The petitioner and the 3rd respondent appeared before this Court along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They were also identified by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the 2/5

Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Perusal of CD file shows that in spite repeated summons issued to the defacto complainant to produce the documents to claim compensation, documents were not produced and the compensation was not claimed.

5.Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner and also in view of the joint compromise memo, 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.40 of 2023 pending on the file of the 1st respondent police in respect of this petitioner. 6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in Crime No.40 of 2023, pending on the file of the 1st respondent police is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioner. The compromise memo is recorded and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order.

30.06.2023 3/5

NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No TM To 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Chinnakovilankulam Police Station, Tenkasi District.

(Cr.No.40 of 2023) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

G.ILANGOVAN ,J.

TM 30.06.2023 5/5