Muthukumar v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.09.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP CRL.O.P(MD)Nos.15822 and 15874 of 2022 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15822 of 2022:- 1.Muthukumar 2.Muthuramaraj 3.Gandhimathi 4.Kanimozhi 5.Ponnuchamy 6.Vallimail
...Petitioners
vs.
1.State represented through the Inspector of Police, (in Cr.No.118 of 2021) 2.Prabakaran 3.Muthukannan 4.Ponnusamy 5.Priya & Muthupriya
...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to call for the records of the impugned Charge Sheet in C.C.No.168 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Paramakudi and to quash the same as illegal as against the petitioners.
1/6
For Petitioners :Mr.K.Sathiyendhran For R1 :Mr.R.Sivakumar Government Advocate (Crl.side) For R2 :Mr.A.Abdul Kabur Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15822 of 2022:- 1.Prabakaran 2.Ponnusamy 3.Priya & Muthupriya 4.Rajkumar 5.Lilavathi 6.Varsha 7.Selvi ... Petitioners vs.
1.State represented through the Inspector of Police, (in Cr.No.117 of 2021) 2.Muthukumar 3.Muthuramaraj 4.Vallimayil
...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to call for the records of the impugned Charge Sheet in C.C.No.168 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Paramakudi and to quash the same as illegal as against the petitioners.
For Petitioners :Mr.A.Abdul Kabur For R1 : Mr.R.Sivakumar Government Advocate (Crl.side) For R2 :Mr.K.Sathiyendhran 2/6
COMMON ORDER The learned Counsel for the Petitioners in Crl.O.P.(MD)No. 15874 of 2022 submitted that the parties have arrived at a compromise in the village, based on the advise of the elders in the village. It is the case and counter. The Petitioners herein are arrayed as accused in Cr.No.117 of 2021 on the file of the Emaneswaram Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. The complainant in this case is Muthukumar. In the counter case, the Complainant Muthu Kumar, was arrayed as an accused along with five others in Cr.No.118 off 2022, wherein, A2 in Cr.No.117 of 2021, is the Complainant. 2.It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15874 of 2022 that the offences in both the FIR are under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) of IPC r/w Section4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. Therefore, he seeks to quash the FIR.
3.Similarly, the learned Counsel for the second Respondent, who is the Counsel for the Petitioners in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15822 of 2022, made similar submissions.
3/6
4.Accordingly, Joint Compromise Memo filed along with these Petitions. Both parties are available before the Court. Both sides Counsels have affixed their signatures to the Joint Compromise Memo. 5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the parties have arrived at a compromise in the village. 6.Considering the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners in both cases and the submission made the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, both Petitions are allowed based on the Joint Compromise Memo. Accordingly, the FIR in Cr.No.117 of 2017 on the file of the Emaneswaram Police Station, Ramanathapruam District is quashed and the final report filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram, in C.C.No.168 of 2021 is quashed.
22.09.2022 Index:Yes/No cmr 4/6
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi.
2.The Inspector of Police, 5/6
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP , J.
cmr CRL.O.P(MD)Nos.15822 and 15874 of 2022 22.09.2022 6/6