Arockiaraj v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.09.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Crl.O.P.(MD) No.17205 of 2013 and M.P.(MD) Nos. 1 to 3 of 2013 1.Arockiaraj 2.D.Jeyaraj 3.J.Kalaiselvi

...Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3

-Vs1.The State represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Rajapalayam.

(In Crime No.1of 2012) ...1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Manimekalai ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records and documents in connection with C.C.No.182 of 2012 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Srivilliputhur and quash the same. For Petitioners :Mr.Lakshmi Gopinathan For R-1 :Mr.K.Anbarasan, Government Advocate(Crl.side).

For R-2 :Mr.Ananda Padmanabhan ***

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the records in connection with C.C.No.182 of 2012 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Srivilliputhur. 2.Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

3.Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, against the petitioners, a case was registered in Crime No.1 of 2012 on the file of the first respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 494 of I.P.C. After filing the charge sheet, the case was taken on file by the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Srivilliputhur in C.C.No.182 of 2012 and the petitioners are accused No. 1 to 3.

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

4.It appears that on the advise of the elders and relatives, the petitioners and the second respondent have agreed to compromise the matter out of Court and they have also entered compromise. A Joint Compromise Memo, signed by both parties, in the presence of their respective counsels, is also produced before this Court. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has no objection for quashing the charge sheet in C.C.No.182 of 2012. 5.The parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their own will and volition. The identity of the parties are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this Court. The identity of the parties are also confirmed by the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) through the first respondent police.

6.Having regard to the compromise arrived at between the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful or fruitful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence the Charge Sheet in C.C.No.182 of 2012 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Srivilliputhur, is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.

7.Accordingly, the Criminal Original petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl side) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar Encl:- Xerox Copy of Compromise Memo.

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, No.II, Srivilliputhur.

2.-do- Thro' Chief Judicial Magistrate, Virudhunagar. 3.The Sub Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Rajapalayam.

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

+1cc to M/s.Polax Legal Solutions,Advocate,SR. 79791 Crl.O.P.(MD) No.17205 of 2013 and M.P.(MD) Nos. 1 to 3 of 2013 cmr KK/JC/SAR 2/12.10.2017/ 2P- 6C/ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/