H.Anvar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.09.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR 1.H.Anvar 2.H.Ajish 3.P.Guna 4.A.Vikki @ Vignesh ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police, Pattukottai Police Station, Thanjavur.
(Cr.No.477 of 2024) 2.H.Sadesh Kumar @ Sathiskumar 3.Shyamala 4.Arunadevi ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records and quash FIR in Cr.No.477 of 2024 dated 18.08.2024 for the alleged offences under Section 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 296(b), 351(3) of the Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 1/6
Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment against Women Act, 2002 on the file of the first respondent. For Petitioners : Mr.K.Dinesh For R1 : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R2 : Mr.K.Seenivasan
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 528 BNSS seeking orders to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No.477 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same as illegal against the petitioners. 2.The case of the prosecution is that there existed a civil dispute between the parties, due to which, the accused persons abused the second respondent in filthy language and assaulted the respondents 2 to 4 and hence, the second respondent preferred a complaint. 3.When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the second 2/6
respondent has lodged a complaint before the first respondent and on that basis, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.477 of 2024 dated 18.08.2024 for the offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 296(b), 351(3) of the Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 against the petitioners.
4.The case is still under the investigation. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.
5.A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court which have been signed by the petitioners and the respondents 2 to 4 and also by their respective counsel. The petitioners and the respondents 2 to 4 were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by Mr.T.Jegatheesan, Grade-I Police 991, Pattukottai Police Station, Thanjavur District 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. 3/6
6.In the instant case, the dispute is of personal in nature and now the parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has power to quash the complaint for the offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 296(b), 351(3) of the Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.
7.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.
8. 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 Crime No.477 of 2024 pending before the first respondent police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
4/6
9.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.477 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order. 30.09.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No gns To 1.The Inspector of Police, Pattukottai Police Station, Thanjavur.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.
gns 30.09.2024 6/6