Madras High Court
Sham Anandharaj vs State Represented By on 12 August, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14490 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 12.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
CRL.O.P (MD) No.14490 of 2022
Sham Anandharaj,
The Proprietor,
Beauty Velvether,
Madurai District.
: Petitioner
Vs
1. State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Vadipatty Police Station,
Madurai District.
in Crime No.198/2022
2. Vilashini,
: Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records from the file of the first respondent in Crime
No.198 of 2022 and quash the same.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14490 of 2022
For petitioner : M/s.Jegadeesh Pandian M,
For R1 : Mr.A.Albert James,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R2 : Mr.B.Viswanathan
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in
Crime No.198 of 2022, on the file of the first respondent
2.The case of the prosecution is that due to sudden accident in the
petitioner's unit, the second respondent's husband lost his finger and he was
provided proper medical treatment. 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 petitioner and the second respondent and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14490 of 2022
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.M.Dhanasekaran, HC of Police, Vadipatti 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 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 287 and 338 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.14490 of 2022
proceedings in Crime No. 198 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. 198 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.
12.08.2022
Internet:Yes./No
Index:Yes/no
lr
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Vadipatty Police Station,
Madurai 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.14490 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
lr
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P (MD) No.14490 of 2022
12.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
