V.Manikandan v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. O.P(MD) No.16190 of 2024 and CRL.M.P.(MD) Nos.10184 & 10185 of 2024 V.Manikandan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The State through the Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mudukulathur, Ramanathapuram.
2.The Inspector of Police, Mudukulathur Police Station, Ramanathapuram.
(Crime No.119 of 2018) 2.P.Saravanan ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in Spl.S.C.No.10 of 2019, on the file of the Special Court for Trial of cases RU/SC/ST (POA) Act, Ramanathapuram and Page No. 1 of 5
quash the same as against the petitioner alone. For petitioner : Ms.A.Jeyasudha For R1 : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.S.Ramasundarvijayaraj *****
O R D E R
This petition has been filed by the petitioner to call for the records pertaining to Spl.S.C.No.10 of 2019, on the file of the Special Court for Trial of cases RU/SC/ST (POA) Act, Ramanathapuram, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 341, 324 and 506(1) of IPC and Section 5 of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act, in Crime No.119 of 2018 and quash the same as against the petitioner alone.
2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner and defacto complainant are residing in same locality. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the police has registered FIR in Cr.No.119 of 2018 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 341, 324 and 506(1) of IPC and Section 5 of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Page No. 2 of 5
Loss) Act and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act.
3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel on both sides represented that during pendency of the case in Spl.S.C.No.10 of 2019, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and to that effect, they have entered into a compromise and the same was filed before this Court.
4. Today, the defacto-complainant and the accused are present and the Court enquired about the terms of compromise. The defactocomplainant represented that they entered into a compromise as they are residing in same locality and he has no objection in allowing this petition. A compromise memo, dated 03.04.2025 signed by the parties and their respective counsels, is also filed before this Court.
5. This Court has perused the terms of the compromise memo.
6. Considering the nature of the offences, the relationship between the parties and they have also entered into a compromise along with counter case, it is appropriate to allow this petition. Page No. 3 of 5
7. Recording the said compromise memo, this petition is allowed and Spl.S.C.No.10 of 2019, on the file of the Special Court for Trial of cases RU/SC/ST (POA) Act, Ramanathapuram, is quashed as far as the petitioner is concerned. Consequently, connected M.Ps are closed. 22.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No (2/2) Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To 1.The Special Judge, The Special Court for Trial of cases RU/SC/ST (POA) Act, Ramanathapuram.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mudukulathur, Ramanathapuram.
3.The Inspector of Police, Mudukulathur Police Station, Ramanathapuram.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Page No. 4 of 5
P.DHANABAL,J apd Crl.OP(MD) No.16190 of 2024 22.04.2025 (2/2) Page No. 5 of 5