Madras High Court
Mahesh vs The State Represented By on 3 August, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13896 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
CRL.O.P (MD) No.13896 of 2022
Mahesh ... Petitioner/Accused No.1
Vs
1. The State Represented by
The Sub Inspector of Police,
Anjugramam Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
In Crime No.538 of 2014) ... 1st Respondent/ Complainant
2. Rajkumar ... 2nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant
3. Nivas .... 3rd Respondent/ Victim
4. Ajith .... 4th Respondent/Victim
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records in C.C.No.57 of 2021, on the file of the
learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil, and to quash the same against
the petitioner alone.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Aravinthan
For R1 : Mr.A.Albert James
Government Advocate (Crl.side)
For R2 to R4 : Ms. M.Nandhini Priyadharshini
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13896 of 2022
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the Charge
Sheet in C.C.No.57 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.III,
Nagercoil, in Crime No.538 of 2014, for the offences punishable under
Section 420 I.P.C and Sections 10 and 24 of Emigration Act., against the
petitioner and others.
2. The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have
decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among
themselves.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the matter has
been settled out of the Court between the accused person, the defacto
complainant and two victims and they have filed a Joint Memo of
Compromise before this Court which have been signed by the petitioner, the
defacto complainant and two victims and also by their respective counsel.
The petitioner, the defacto complainant and two victims were also present in
person before this Court and they were identified by the learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13896 of 2022
Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and Mr.R.Kalyana Sundaram, SSI - 489,
Anjugramam Police Station, Kanyakumari District. This Court also enquired
both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable
settlement between themselves.
4. 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 offences
punishable under Section 420 I.P.C and Sections 10 and 24 of Emigration
Act.
5. 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.
6. 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 C.C.No.57 of 2021 pending before the Judicial Magistrate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13896 of 2022
No.III, Nagercoil, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable
in nature.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as
a sequel, the proceedings in C.C.No.57 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil, is quashed and the terms of joint compromise
memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
03.08.2022
Internet:Yes./No
Index:Yes/no
ebsi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13896 of 2022
To
1. The Sub Inspector of Police,
Anjugramam Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13896 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
ebsi
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P (MD) No.13896 of 2022
03.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
