Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/15326/2020allowed

N.V.Murugesan v. The Inspector Of Police

2020-12-21Honourable Mrs Justice J. Nisha Banu2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15326 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.12.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15326 of 2020 N.V.Murugesan ... Petitioners/Sole Accused Vs.

1.The State rep.by Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukkottai Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.502 of 2015) ... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.C.Navaneethan(Died) ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant 3.Ajaykumar ... 3rd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the FIR in Crime No.502 of 2015 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukkottai Police Station, Madurai District and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.F.Deepak For R1 : Mr.V.Neelakandan, Additional Public Prosecutor For R3 : Mr.C.Lakshmanan

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in crime No.502 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent police.

2.The second respondent/defacto complainant died and the death certificate of the second respondent and the legal heir certificate of the third respondent, who is the son of the second respondent, also annexed in the typed set of papers. The legal heirs of the second respondent have agreed to compromise the matter. The defacto complainant's son/third respondent as well as the petitioner/accused are present before this Court and they are identified by the respective learned counsel and both the parties have filed a joint compromise memo stating that the matter has been amicably resolved between themselves and the third respondent / defacto complainant's son is not willing to prosecute the complaint and therefore, the petitioner would pray for quashing the First Information Report in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15326 of 2020 crime No.502 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent police. 3.The compromise memo is filed before this Court and the parties along with their respective counsel are also personally present before this Court today(21.12.2020) and the third respondent/ defacto complainant's has represented before this Court that the matter has been settled amicably between the parties. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor who was present in the Court had also verified their identity and would state that he has no objection for the above compromise. The parties were also identified by the Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukkottai Police Station, Madurai District.

4.In the result, by recording the compromise, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the First Information Report in crime No.502 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed. The joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AS) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) gns ENCL.: XEROX COPY OF JOINT COMPROMISE MEMO.

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.

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukkottai Police Station, Madurai District.

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

+2 CC to Mr.F.DEEPAK, Advocate SR.No. 26780 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15326 of 2020 21.12.2020 MJ(CO) TR(11.01.2021) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2