Madras High Court
Nagarjun @ Nagaarjun vs The State Represented By on 1 July, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 01.07.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
CRL.O.P (MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P(MD)Nos.6406 and 7545 of 2022
Crl.O.P(MD)No.10232 of 2022
Nagarjun @ Nagaarjun,
: Petitioner
Vs
1.The State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Vadamadurai Police Station,
Vadamadurai,
Dindigul District.
Crime No.264 of 2019.
2. Bakkiyalakshmi,
: Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records in connection with the impugned complaint
in Cr.No.264 of 2019 dated 03.06.2019 pending on the file of the
respondent police and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is
concerned.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
Crl.O.P(MD)No.11938 of 2022
1. Gopal,
2. Muthaiah,
3. Mahendran,
4.Viji,
: Petitioners
Vs
1.The State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Vadamadurai Police Station,
Vadamadurai,
Dindigul District.
Crime No.264 of 2019.
2. Bakkiyalakshmi,
: Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records in connection with the impugned complaint
in Cr.No.264 of 2019 dated 03.06.2019 pending on the file of the
respondent police and quash the same in so far as the petitioners are
concerned.
For Petitioners : M/s.Sarvagan Prabhu S,
(For both cases)
For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar,
(For both cases) Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R2 : Mr. P.Jayasankar
(For both cases)
2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
COMMON ORDER
These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to quash the FIR in
Crime No.264 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 03.06.2019, the defacto
complainant and her daughter went for natural call. At that time, the first
accused person abused the second respondent with filthy language. After
that, villagers came to the place of occurrence and warned the first accused
person. But, all the accused persons attacked them and also threatened the
second respondent with dire consequences. 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.Joint Memos of Compromise have been filed before this Court
which have been signed by the petitioners and the second respondent and
also by their respective counsel. The petitioners and the second respondent
4/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by
Mr.S.Selvaraj, SSI of Police, Vadamadurai Police Station. 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 147, 294(b), 323, 324, 427, 506(2) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil
Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, 2002.
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
proceedings in Crime No.264 of 2019 pending before the first respondent
5/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
8.Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed and as a
sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.264 of 2019 on the file of the first
respondent police, is quashed insofar as the petitioners alone and the terms
of joint compromise memos shall form part and parcel of this order.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
01.07.2022
Internet:Yes./No
Index:Yes/no
lr
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Vadamadurai Police Station,
Vadamadurai,
Dindigul District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
lr
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P (MD) Nos.10232 and 11938 of 2022
01.07.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
