← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/15893/2020disposed of

Lalu v. The Inspector Of Police

2024-04-03Honourable Mr Justice A.A.Nakkiran5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.04.2024 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN Crl.O.P(MD).No.15893 of 2020 and Crl.M.P(MD).Nos.7810 and 7812 of 2020 1.Lalu 2.Simon ... Petitioners (P2 impleaded as 2nd petitioner / accused No.2 as per the order of this Court dated 06.03.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.2126 of 2024 in Crl.O.P(MD).No.15893/2020) Vs.

1. The Inspector of Police, Pudhukadai Police Station, Kanniyakumari District, (Crime No.296 of 2016) S.C.No.226 of 2018 2.Mohammed Subear ... Respondents PRAYER:- Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for records of the charge sheet in S.C.No.226 of 2018 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Padamanabhapuram and quash the same. For Petitioners : Mr.R. Murugan For Respondent No.1 : Mr. R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For 2nd respondent : Mr.V.R. Arunkumar

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for 1/5

records of the charge sheet in S.C.No.226 of 2018 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Padamanabhapuram.

2.The contention of the petitioners is that based on the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.296 of 2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 387, 506(ii) IPC r/w. Section 3(1) of TNPPDL Act, against the petitioners and thereafter, the case has been charge sheeted in S.C.No.226 of 2018 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Padamanabhapuram.

3.The further contention of the petitioners is that they compromised the issue with the 2nd respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioners and the 2nd respondent and also by their respective counsels.

4. The petitioners and the 2nd respondent appeared before this Court along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They were also identified by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired 2/5

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 19.02.2024, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and inclined to quash all further proceedings in S.C.No.226 of 2018 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Padamanabhapuram in respect of the petitioners.

6. In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in S.C.No.226 of 2018 pending on the file of the Additional District Judge, Padamanabhapuram, is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioners. The compromise memo is recorded and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 03.04.2024 Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non Speaking order trp 3/5

To

1. The Additional District Judge, Padamanabhapuram

2. The Inspector of Police, Pudhukadai Police Station, Kanniyakumari District,

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

4/5

A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.

Trp Crl.O.P(MD).No.15893 of 2020 and Crl.M.P(MD).Nos.7810 and 7812 of 2020 03.04.2024 5/5