Haji Mohamed v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.08.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM CRL.O.P (MD) No.13971 of 2022

1. Haji Mohamed

2. Mohamed Rishvan

3. Nashrudeen @ Nasurudeen

4. Abbas @ Abbas Manthiri

5. Riyash Mohamed ... Petitioners Vs

1. The Inspector of Police, Mimisal Police Station, Pudukkottai District (Crime No. 11 of 2018).

2. Navash Khan @ Nawaskhan ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to quash the FIR in Crime No.11 of 2019, on the file of the first respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.M. Suresh 1/5

For Respondents : Mr.A.Albert James (R1) Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Mr.K.Sivakarthi (R2)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.11 of 2019, on the file of the first respondent police. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent/defacto complainant was abused and assaulted by the accused persons with knife on 10.02.2019, at about 09.30PM. 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 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 2/5

Mr.V.Thirumal, Head Constable of Police, Mimisal Taluk Police Station as well as by the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 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 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 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) 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.11 of 2019 pending before the first respondent police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature. 3/5

8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.11 of 2019 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. 03.08.2022 Internet:Yes./No Index:Yes/no PNM To

1. The Inspector of Police, Mimisal Police Station, Pudukkottai District (Crime No. 11 of 2018).

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

4/5

V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

PNM ORDER IN CRL.O.P (MD) No.13971 of 2022 03.08.2022 5/5