Madras High Court
Shanmugam vs State Represented By on 10 August, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13664 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 10.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
CRL.O.P (MD) No.13664 of 2022
1. Shanmugam,
2. Sudharsan,
: Petitioners
Vs
1. State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Karur Police Station,
Pudukkottai District.
Crime.No.29 of 2022.
2. Balasubramanian,
3. Jothilakhshmi,
: Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records relating to the Crime No.29 of 2022 dt
16/06/2022 on the file of the first respondent police and to quash the same
in so far as the petitioners are concerned.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13664 of 2022
For Petitioners : M/s Saravanan.N,
For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R2 and R3 : Mr. S.Sathya Chidambaran
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in
Crime No.29 of 2022, on the file of the first respondent.
2.The case of the prosecution is that due to civil dispute, the
petitioners abused the private respondent with filthy language. Hence the
complaint.
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.A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court
which have been signed by the petitioners and the respondents 2 and 3 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13664 of 2022
also by their respective counsel. The petitioners and respondents 2 and 3
were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by
Mr.C.A.Selvakumar Gr-II, Police Constable, Karur Police Station 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.
5.In the instant case, the dispute is of civil 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, 324 and 506(2) IPC.
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13664 of 2022
proceedings in Crime No. 29 of 2022 pending before the first respondent
police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a
sequel, the proceedings in Crime No. 29 of 2022 on the file of the first
respondent police, is quashed insofar as the petitioners alone and the terms
of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
10.08.2022
(1/2)
Internet:Yes./No
Index:Yes/no
lr
Note:Issue Order copy on 11.08.2022
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Karur Police Station,
Pudukkottai 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.13664 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
lr
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P (MD) No.13664 of 2022
10.08.2022
(1/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
