Madras High Court
Nataraj vs The Inspector Of Police on 3 August, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13988 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.13988 of 2022
Nataraj
... Petitioner
Vs
1. The Inspector of Police,
E 3 Anna Nagar Police Station, Madurai,
Madurai District (Crime No. 610 of 2019).
2. Kanagarajan
... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
praying to call for the records pertaining to quash the Charge Sheet in
C.C.No.421 of 2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Madurai
and quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.B.Jeyakumar
For Respondent : Mr.A.Albert James (R1)
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
Mr.S.Varatha Rajan (R2)
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13988 of 2022
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the Charge
Sheet in C.C.No.421 of 2020 pending on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate,No.6, Madurai, for the offences punishable under Sections
294(b), 323, 506(i) IPC, in Crime No.610 of 2019.
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. A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed 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 Mr.G.Krishnan, SI of Police, Annanagar (L&O), Madurai,
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13988 of 2022
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
offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(i) IPC.
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.421 of 2020 pending before the Judicial
Magistrate No.6, Madurai, even though, the offences involved are not
compoundable in nature.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13988 of 2022
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and
as a sequel, the proceedings in C.C.No.421 of 2020, on the file of the
Judicial Magistrate No.6, Madurai is quashed and the terms of joint
compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
03.08.2022
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
PNM
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate No.6, Madurai
2.The Inspector of Police,
Ramanathapuram AWPS Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13988 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
PNM
ORDER IN
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13988 of 2022
03.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
