C.Rajiv Kanth v. The Inspector Of Police
[BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.06.2023 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN 1.C.Rajiv Kanth 2.Shalini 3.Archana 4.M.Jayesh ... Petitioners / accused No.1 to 4 Vs.
1. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thilagar Thidal, Madurai South, Madurai City, Crime No.6 of 2020.
... 1st Respondent / Complainant 2.B.Haripriya ... 2nd Respondent/ Defacto complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in C.C.No.300 of 2021, on the file of the Additional Mahila Judge (Magistrate Cadre), Madurai, in Crime No.6 of 2020, on the file of the first respondent and to quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.V.Pandiyan For R1 : Mr.S.Manikandan Government Advocate (Crl Side) For R2 : Mr.S.Muniyandi 1/4
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.300 of 2021, on the file of the Additional Mahila Judge (Magistrate Cadre), Madurai, in Crime No.6 of 2020, on the file of the first respondent.
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.6 of 2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 294(b) and 506(i) of I.P.C and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, against the petitioners.
3. The further contention of the petitioners is that there is a matrimonial issue and 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 Government Advocate (Crl Side) and the 2/4
Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Hence, the Joint Compromise Memo is recorded.
6. Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners and also in view of the compromise memo, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and inclined to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No. 300 of 2021, on the file of the Additional Mahila Judge (Magistrate Cadre), Madurai, in respect of the petitioners.
7. In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in C.C.No.300 of 2021, on the file of the Additional Mahila Judge (Magistrate Cadre), Madurai, is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioner alone. The compromise memo is recorded and the terms of compromise memo shall form part of this order. 22.06.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Ls 3/4
G.ILANGOVAN, J., Ls To
1. The Additional Mahila Judge (Magistrate Cadre), Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thilagar Thidal, Madurai South, Madurai City, 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
22.06.2023 4/4