Muthuselvam v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.12.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

1. Muthuselvam

2. Minor Visnu @ Thakkarasu

3. Suthakar

4. Minor Sudalaiyandi @ Surya

5. Viknesh @ Vignesh Lakshmanan

6. Karthick ... Petitioners Vs

1. The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Alangulam Police Station, Tenkasi District.

Fir No.390 of 2024.

2. Ashok ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for records relating to the FIR in Crime No.390/2024 dated 10.09.2024 on the file of the 1st Respondent police and Quash the same as against the petitioners/Accused is concern. 1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.R. Manojkumar For Respondent : K.Sanjai Gandhi, (R1) Government Advocate (Crl.Side) M/s. M.Veeravel Pandiyan (R2)

ORDER

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.390 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent Police.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity on 10.09.2024 at 07.30p.m., the accused persons attacked the defacto complainant, abused him with filthy language. Hence this present case.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners 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.390 of 2024, dated 10.09.2024 for the offences under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 131, 324(4) and 351(3) of BNS Act against the petitioners. 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, dated 18.12.2024, has been filed before this Court, which has been signed by the petitioners and the second respondent and also by their respective counsel. The petitioners and the second respondent were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by Mr.K.P.Murugan, SSI 620, Alangulam Police Station, Tenkasi District, 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. In the instant case, the dispute is of personal in nature and now the parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has power to quash the complaint for the offences under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 131, 324(4) and 351(3) of BNS Act.

3/6

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.390 of 2024, 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.390 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. 19.12.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No PNM 4/6

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Alangulam Police Station, Tenkasi District.

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

5/6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

PNM Order in 19.12.2024 6/6