Madras High Court
Pebin Raj vs The State Represented By on 28 July, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13620 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 28.07.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
CRL.O.P (MD) No.13620 of 2022
1. Pebin Raj
2. Manikandan
3. Arun Raja ... Petitioners/ Accused No.1 to 3
Vs
1. The State Represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Pazhavoor Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
Crime No. 215 of 2021 .... 1st Respondent /Complainant
2. Muthu Pemilan ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records and quash the final report as far as the
petitioners are concerned in C.C.No.97 of 2022 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate Court, Vallioor, Tirunelveli District.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Micheal Heldon Kumar
For R1 : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R2 : Mr.Shaazim Saagar
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13620 of 2022
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the
proceedings in C.C No.97 of 2022, on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate Court, Vallioor, Tirunelveli District, in Crime No.215 of 2021
for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(1)
I.P.C, on the file of the first respondent Police.
2.The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided
to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among
themselves.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is a case
and case in counter. The defacto complainant and the accused persons
settled the matter out of the Court and they have filed a Joint Memo of
Compromise 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 the learned Additional Public
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13620 of 2022
Prosecutor and Mr.P.Subramanian, Pazhavoor Police Station, Tirunelveli
District. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the
parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.
4. 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 offences
punishable under Sections 147, 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(1) I.P.C.
5. 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.
6. 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.97 of 2022 pending before the Judicial Magistrate
Court, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District, even though, the offences involved
are not compoundable in nature.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13620 of 2022
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as
a sequel, the proceedings in C.C.No.97 of 2022, on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate Court, Vallioor, Tirunelveli District is quashed and the terms of
joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
28.07.2022
Internet:Yes./No
Index:Yes/no
ebsi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.13620 of 2022
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Pazhavoor 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.13620 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
ebsi
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P (MD) No.13620 of 2022
28.07.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
