BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 25.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
CRL.O.P (MD) No.14997 of 2022
Karthick Moorthy ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs
1. The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Thermal Nagar Police Station, Thoothukudi.
Crime No.64 of 2022 .... 1stRespondent /Complainant
2. Ayyanar ... 2ndRespondent/Defacto Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to call for the records and quash the Crime No.64 of 2022, pending on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Manokumar
For R1 : Mr.A.Albert James
Government Advocate (Crl.side)
For R2 : Mr.Shaazim Shagar
1/5
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.64 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent. 2.The contention of the petitioner is that based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first respondent registered First Information Report in Crime No.64 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Section 381 of I.P.C., against the petitioner. 3.The case is still at the stage of investigation. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the defacto complainant and the accused person settled the matter out of the Court and they have filed a Joint Memo of Compromise before this Court which have 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 the learned
2/5
Government Advocate and Mr.A.Gomathi Nayagam, SSI, - 2137, Thermal Nagar Police Station, Thoothukud District. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.
5.In the instant case, the dispute is of personal in nature and the parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has to power to quash the complaint for the offence under Section 381 of I.P.C.
6. The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Panjab and another reported in (2012)10 SCC 303 and Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath) reported in (2017)9 SCC 641 were taken into consideration.
7. 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.64 of 2022 pending before the first respondent police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
3/5
8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.64 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed insofar as the petitioner alone and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
25.08.2022
Internet:Yes./No Index:Yes/no ebsi
To
1. The Inspector of Police, Thermal Nagar Police Station, Thoothukudi,
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
ebsi
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P (MD) No.14997 of 2022
25.08.2022
5/5
Comments