Madras High Court
V.K.A.Vijayaraj vs State Represented By on 17 August, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14735 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
CRL.O.P (MD) No.14735 of 2022
V.K.A.Vijayaraj,
: Petitioner
Vs
1.State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station, Nilakkottai,
Dindigul District
(Crime No. 8 of 2016).
(C.C.No.262 of 2016)
2. Rajeshwari,
: Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records relating to the case in C.C.No. 262 of 2016,
on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakkottai and quash the
same against the petitioner.
For petitioner : M/s.Guhan K,
For R1 : Mr.A.Albert James,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14735 of 2022
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the Charge
Sheet in C.C.No. 262 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Nilakkottai, for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 406 and
506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.8 of 2016.
2.The case of the prosecution is that due to family dispute, the defacto
complainant lodged a complaint against the accused persons, for which, an
FIR in Crime No.8 of 2016 had been registered. After investigation, charge
sheet had been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakkottai and
the same was taken on file as C.C.No. 262 of 2016.
3.The complainant and her husband present before this Court. The
complainant stated that she was compromised with all the accused persons
in Crime No.8 of 2016 and further, she did not like to continue the
proceedings against them.
4.The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14735 of 2022
to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among
themselves.
5. 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
Mrs.M.Susica, WSSI of Police, Nillakottai All Women 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.
6. 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), 406 and 506(i) of IPC.
7. The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14735 of 2022
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.
8. 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. 262 of 2016, on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Nilakkottai, even though, the offences involved are not
compoundable in nature.
9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as
a sequel, the entire proceedings in C.C.No. 262 of 2016, on the file of the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakkottai is quashed and the terms of joint
compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
17.08.2022
Internet:Yes./No
Index:Yes/no
lr
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14735 of 2022
All Women Police Station, Nilakkottai,
Dindigul 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.14735 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
lr
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P (MD) No.14735 of 2022
17.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
