← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/18009/2018allowed

Revathi v. The Inspector Of Police

2019-11-21Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan2 pages

Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 18009 of 2018 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.11.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 18009 of 2018 Revathi

...Petitioner/A1

Vs.

1. State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Trichy District, Trichy.

(Crime No. 26 of 2015)

2. S. Sugendran

3. M. Gnanasekaran

4. L. Josephraj

5. T. Anandan

6. Gurunathan

7. D.S. Nathan

8. A. Chinnadurai ... Respondents/Victims PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to call for the entire records pertaining to the case in Crime No. 26 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent Police may be quashed as against the petitioner.

For Petitioners : Mr.M. Pitchai Muthu For Respondent-1 : Mr. K. Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (crl. Side)

ORDER

This petition has been filed to quash the Crime No. 26 of 2015 on the file of the first respondent Police, as against the petitioner.

2. On perusal of the records there are two accused in the said crime and the petitioner was arrayed as A-1. The case of the prosecution is that the victim, namely, respondents-3 to 8 gave a sum of Rs.19,20,000/- under false promise given by that they were arranged government job, but they were failed to do so. Therefore, the victims have lodged a complaint. While being so, pending investigation, the petitioner along with other accused, namely, A2 settled the entire amount to the victims, namely, the respondents3 to 8. In so far as the A2 is concerned, he filed a petition to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 18009 of 2018 quash the First Information Report under compromise in Crl.O.P. (MD) No. 13588 of 2018 the same was allowed by order dated 13.08.2018.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the petitioner and the other accused have settled the amount to the victims, namely, the respondents-3 to 8.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances, keeping pendency of the FIR would not serve any purpose. Accordingly, the Criminal Origianl Peittion is allowed. The proceedings of the Fir in Crime No. 26 of 2015 is quashed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) ksa To

1. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Trichy District, Trichy.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 18009 of 2018 21.11.2019 KM/(19.12.2019) 2P 3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2