Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/15855/2020allowed

Senthil Arasu v. The Inspector Of Police

2024-04-15Honourable Mr Justice A.A.Nakkiran4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.04.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15855 of 2020 and Crl.MP(MD)No.7764 of 2020 1.Senthil Arasu 2.Sharmila ... Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 & 2 Vs.

1.The State through The Inspector of Police, Srirangam Police Station, Trichy District.

(In Crime No.257 of 2019) ... 1st Respondent / Complainant 2.Jayabharathi ... 2nd Respondent / Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the final report in C.C.No.515 of 2020 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli and quash the same as illegal and devoid of merits.

For petitioners : M/s.Seeni Syed Amma for Lajapathi Roy Associates For R1 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.S.Ramsudar Vijay Raj 1/4

O RDER This petition has been filed to quash the C.C.No.515 of 2020 pending on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli. 2.The contention of the petitioner is that based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first respondent registered First Information Report in Crime No.257 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 448, 506(2) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, against the petitioners.

3.The further contention of the petitioners is that they compromised the issue between them and the second respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioners and the second respondent and also by their respective counsels.

4.The petitioners and the second respondent appeared along with their respective counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards before this Court. They were also identified by the learned Additional Public 2/4

Prosecutor. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Hence the Compromise Memo is 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 11.03.2024, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending. 6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in C.C.No.515 of 2020, pending on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli, is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioners and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

15.04.2024 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No dss 3/4

A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.

dss To 1.The Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli.

2. The Inspector of Police, Srirangam Police Station, Trichy District.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15855 of 2020 and Crl.MP(MD)No.7764 of 2020 15.04.2024 4/4