Saravana Perumal v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.02.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Saravanaperumal ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, Eppodumvendran Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

2.Shanmugaraj ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the entire records relating to the Crime No.88 of 2022, dated 04.08.2022 on the file of the Eppodumvendran Police Station and quash the same in so far as the petitioner/sole accused concerned.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Saravanan For R1 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For R2 : Mr.J.Velmurugan, 1/6

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking orders, to call for the entire records relating to the Crime No.88 of 2022, dated 04.08.2022 on the file of the Eppodumvendran Police Station and quash the same in so far as the petitioner/sole accused concerned.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner posted some bad comments below the video of village festival in the youtube channel named as NSP Official and when the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the second respondent has lodged a complaint before the first respondent and on that basis, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.88 of 2022, dated 04.08.2022 for the offences under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC, against the petitioner.

2/6

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 second respondent and also by their respective counsel. The petitioner and the second respondent were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by the concerned Police Officer 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.

6. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has power to quash the complaint for the offences under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) IPC.

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 3/6

(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.88 of 2022 pending before the first respondent police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.88 of 2022 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. 20.02.2023 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No das 4/6

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Eppodumvendran Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

G.ILANGOVAN,J.

das Order made in Dated: 20.02.2023 6/6