R.S.Pandiyaraj v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.11.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G. ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P(MD)No.14853 of 2021:

R.S.Pandiyaraj Petitioner/ Sole Accused Vs 1.The State Rep by the Inspector of Police, Uthamapalayam Police Station, Theni District.

Respondent 1 / Complainant 2.Doss Respondent No.2/Defacto Complainant Crl.O.P(MD)No.14943 of 2021:

Doss Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs 1.The State Rep by the Inspector of Police, Uthamapalayam Police Station, Theni District.

Respondent No.1/ Complainant 2.R.S.Pandiyarajan Respondent No.2/Defacto Complainant PRAYER in Crl.O.P(MD)No.14853 of 2021: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for records pertains to the proceedings in Crime No.402 of 2014, on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary. PRAYER in Crl.O.P(MD)No.

14943 of 2021 : Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for records pertains to the proceedings in FIR in Crime No.401 of 2014, on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sugadev For R2 : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew (In Crl.O.P(MD)No.14853 of 2021) For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew For R2 :Mr.T.Sugadev (In Crl.O.P(MD)No.14943 of 2021) For R1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate (in both Crl.OPs) 1/3

C O M M O N O R D E R Heard both sides.

2.These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime Nos. 401 & 402 of 2014, on the file of the respondent police, for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b) & 307 IPC & 294(b), 323, 506(i) IPC respectively.

3.The second respondent / defacto complainant as well as the petitioner/accused in both Criminal Original Petitions are present before this Court and they are identified by the respective learned counsel and both the parties have filed joint compromise memos stating that the matters in issue between them has been amicably resolved and therefore, the second respondent / defacto complainant is not willing to prosecute the case and therefore would pray for quashing the FIRs.

4. The compromise memos are filed before this Court and the parties are also present at the learned Additional Public Prosecutor office and their identity has also been verified through video conference. Since the matters in issue has been compromised between the parties and the defacto complainant would submit that no injuries have been sustained by him, no purpose will be served in keeping the First Information Report pending.

5. In the result, by recording the compromise, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed and the proceedings in Crime Nos.Crime Nos. 401 & 402 of 2014, on the file of the respondent police are quashed. The joint compromise memos shall form part and parcel of this order.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) vrn 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.

2/3

To:- Enclosed copy of the joint Compromise Memo.

1.The Inspector of Police, Uthamapalayam Police Station, Theni District.

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

+1 CC to M/s.T.SUGADEV, Advocate ( SR-33723[F] dated 08/11/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.M.JERIN MATHEW, Advocate ( SR-33722[F] dated 08/11/2021 ) 02.11.2021 RD/PM (18.11.2021) 3P 5C 3/3