Madras High Court
Uma Maheswari vs The State Rep. By on 4 July, 2022
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10844 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04.07.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10844 of 2022
1.Uma Maheswari
2.Selvakani @ Selvi
3.Madavan @ Sivamadhavaraj ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3
Vs
1.The State Rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
Uvari Police Station,
Tirunelveli District. ... 1st Respondent/Complainant
2.Narayana Perumal ...2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records pertaining to P.R.C.No.53 of 2020 on the file
of the Judicial Magistrate, Radhapuram and quash the same.
For Petitioners :Mr.D.Venkatesh
For Respondents : Mr.A.Albert James
Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1
Mr.T.Leninkumar for R2
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10844 of 2022
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the
proceedings in P.R.C.No.53 of 2020 pending on the file of the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Radhapuram for the offences punishable under Sections
147, 148, 448, 294(b), 323, 379, 506(i) of IPC and Section 3 of TNPPDL
Act in Crime No.36 of 2017.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent's son
namely Rajadurai and the first petitioner got married. Due to some
matrimonial dispute they are living separately and a divorce case is also
pending. On 05.04.2017, at about 4.00 p.m. the petitioners trespassed into
the 2nd respondent's house and abused him with filthy language, pushed him
down, damaged his articles and also threatened him with dire consequences.
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10844 of 2022
4.A Joint Memo of Compromise has 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
were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by
Mr.V.Nambhiraja, Grade I Constable, Uvari 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 power to quash the complaint for the offence under
Sections 147, 148, 448, 294(b), 323, 379, 506(i) of IPC and Section 3 of
TNPPDL Act.
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10844 of 2022
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 P.R.C.No.53 of 2020 pending before the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Radhapuram, 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 P.R.C.No.53 of 2020 pending before the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Radhapuram, is quashed and the terms of joint
compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
04.07.2022
Internet:Yes./No
Index:Yes/no
vsd
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Uvari Police Station,
Tirunelveli 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.10844 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
vsd
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P(MD) No.10844 of 2022
04.07.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
