Roselet vs The Inspector Of Police
2022 Latest Caselaw 13342 Mad

                                                                         Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12877 of 2021

                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                  DATED: 26.07.2022

                                                       CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

                                           Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12877 of 2021
                                                        and
                                       Crl.M.P(MD)Nos.6620 and 6621 of 2021

                     1.Roselet

                     2.Thangaraj

                     3.Berlinraj

                     4.Venish Sheeba                         ... Petitioners/Accused Nos. 2 to 5

                                                             Vs.

                     1.The Inspector of Police,
                        All Women Police Station,
                        Marthandam,
                        Kanyakumari District.
                       (Crime No.31 of 2018).                ... 1st Respondent/Complainant.

                     2.Josephine Rincy                 ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant.

                     PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
                     praying to call for the records relating to the impugned charge sheet in
                     C.C.No.133       of   2020   on   the   file   of    Judicial    Magistrate-II,
                     Padmanabhapuram in so far as the petitioners / accused nos.2 to 5 are
                     concerned, quash the same.

                     1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                           Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12877 of 2021



                                        For Petitioners    : Mr.A.Rajkumar Sen
                                        For R-1            : Mr.A.Albert James,
                                                             Government Advocate,
                                                             Criminal Side.
                                        For R-2            : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar



                                                           ORDER

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the

impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.133 of 2020 on the file of Judicial

Magistrate-II, Padmanabhapuram.

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to matrimonial dispute, a

case was registered against the petitioners in Crime No.31 of 2018 for

offences under Sections 498(A) and 406 I.P.C read with Sections 4 and 6

of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 at the instance of the second

respondent. Thereafter, the final report was filed and it was taken on file

as C.C.No.133 of 2020 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate-II,

Padmanabhapuram. The petitioners alleged that without any proper

evidence, a case has been registered against the petitioners. Aggrieved

over the same, the present Criminal Original Petition has been filed to

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12877 of 2021

quash the impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.133 of 2020 on the file of

Judicial Magistrate-II, Padmanabhapuram.

3.The case is under trial. 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 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 Ms.C.Asha, Woman Head Constable 1928, A.W.P.S

Marthandam, Kanyakumari District, 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.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12877 of 2021

5. In the instant case, the dispute is of matrimonial 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 498(A) and 406 I.P.C read with Sections 4 and 6

of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961.

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 C.C.No.133 of 2020 pending before the learned

Judicial Magistrate-II, Padmanabhapuram, even though, the offences

involved are not compoundable in nature.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12877 of 2021

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and

as a sequel, the proceedings in C.C.No.133 of 2020 on the file of the

learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Padmanabhapuram is quashed and the

terms of joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

26.07.2022

Internet:Yes Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order Nsr

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Padmanabhapuram.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Marthandam, Kanyakumari District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Maduraiy.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12877 of 2021

V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

Nsr

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.12877 of 2021

26.07.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis