Irudhyadeepan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.08.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM Irudhyadeepan, : Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector of Police, V.K.Puram Police Station, Tirunelveli District (Crime No. 214 of 2021).

2. Epan Stephan Raj, : Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to call for the entire records relating to the STC No. 288 of 2022, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamuthiram, Tirunelveli and quash the same.

For petitioner : Mr.Balasubramanian.S., For R1 : Mr.A.Albert James, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 :Mr. R.Senthil Kumar 1/5

ORDER

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the Charge Sheet in STC No. 288 of 2022, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamuthiram, Tirunelveli, for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 352 and 506(1) IPC, in Crime No.214 of 2021. 2.The case of the prosecution is that due to money dispute, the petitioner assaulted the second respondent and abused him with filthy language. Hence the complaint.

3.The case is under trial. 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 petitioner and the second respondent and also by their respective counsel. The petitioner and the second respondent were also present in person before this Court and they were 2/5

identified by Mr.R.Gomathinayaranan, SSI of Police, V.K.Puram 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 294(b), 352 and 506(1) 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 STC No. 288 of 2022, on the file of the learned 3/5

Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamuthiram, Tirunelveli even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in STC No. 288 of 2022, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambasamuthiram, Tirunelveli is quashed and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.

22.08.2022 Internet:Yes Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order lr To

1. The Inspector of Police, V.K.Puram Police Station, Tirunelveli District 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai 4/5

V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

lr 22.08.2022 5/5