Bala Murugan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.12.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Crl.O.P(MD)No.21684 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.13433 of 2024 1.Bala Murugan 2.Devaraj 3.Muthu Mari ... Petitioners -Vs1.The State rep. by its The Inspector of Police, Perungudi Police Station, Madurai District.
(Crime No.168 of 2024) 2.Mani Maran ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition - filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Shuraksha Sanhita, to call for the entire records in relating to the impugned FIR in Crime No.168 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Sethu Pandian For R1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.M.D.Balaganesh 1/5
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.168 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent Police.
2. The case of the prosecution is that while the defacto complainant and his three workers were doing pipeline work near the petitioner's house, the first and second petitioners have abused the defacto complainant in filthy languages and the second accused attacked the defacto complainant by using pipe. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the second respondent has lodged a complaint before the first respondent Police and on that basis, F.I.R. came to be registered in Crime No.168 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 115(2) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023.
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.
2/5
5. A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court, which has been signed by the petitioner 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 Mr.MuthuPadni, SSI of Police, Perungudi Police Station, Madurai District as well as by the learned counsel 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. In the instant case, the parties have compromised the matter amicably. The High Court has power to quash the complaint even if the offences are non compoundable in nature, considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
7. The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012)10 SCC 303 and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat) 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.168 of 2024, pending before the 3/5
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.168 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. It is made clear that all consequential proceedings with regard to this first information report shall also be closed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
10.12.2024 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ta To 1.The Inspector of Police, Perungudi Police Station, Madurai District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5
M.NIRMAL KUMAR,J.
ta Crl.O.P(MD)No.21684 of 2024 10.12.2024 5/5