Somasundaram v. The Inspector Of Police,

Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.19428 & 22429 of 2016 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.02.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.19428 and 22429 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.9743, 9744, 11696 and 11697 of 2016 1.Somasundaram 2.Yalini 3.Seethalakshmi 4.Dharshini ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19428 of 2016 Rishitharan ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22429 of 2016 -vs1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Srirangam, Trichy City.

(Crime No.3 of 2006) ... Respondent/Complainant 2.Matheswari ... Respondent/Defacto Complainant in both petitions COMMON PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash C.C.No.91 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Trichy.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Illanchezian For R1 : Mr.A.Robinson Government Advocate (Crl.side) For R2 : Mr.C.Arul Vadivel @ Sekar (in both petitions) COMMON ORDER The petitioners are figuring as accused in C.C.No.91 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Trichy. The learned counsel for the accused submitted that the parties have arrived at an amicable resolution of the issue and on that basis C.M.A.No.1867 of 2019 was disposed of on 17.09.2019.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.19428 & 22429 of 2016 2.The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners have acted as per the terms of the compromise memo. One of the clause in the compromise memo states that the complainant will not have any objection for quashing C.C.No.91 of 2016. 3.Therefore, I am of the view that the continuance of the impugned prosecution is not warranted.

4.The learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that he is not aware of the compromise memo and that he may need time to get instructions.

5.In as much as the compromise memo formed part of the order in C.M.A.No.1867 of 2019, I am of the view that nothing more is required.

6.In this view of the matter, the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.91 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Trichy, is quashed and these Criminal Original Petitions stand allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are allowed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) pnn To 1.The Judge, Additional Mahila Court, Trichy. 2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Srirangam, Trichy City.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.19428 and 22429 of 2016 21.02.2020 JMN(05.03.2020) 2P : 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2