Madras High Court
S.Murugeswaran @ Murugesan vs State Through The Inspector Of ... on 20 June, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10906 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10906 of 2022 and
Crl.M.P(MD).No.6878 of 2022
S.Murugeswaran @ Murugesan ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.State through the Inspector of Police,
Subramaniyapuram Police Station,
Madurai District.
(Crime No.349 of 2021)
2.Anitha ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying
to call for the records to quash the FIR in Crime No.349 of 2021, dated
23.06.2021 on the file of the 1st respondent police with respect of the
petitioner / accused.
For Petitioner : Mr.J. Mathesh
For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For R2 : Mr. T. Sivakkumar
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10906 of 2022
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.
349 of 2021, on the file of the first respondent police.
2.The complaint has been given by the wife against the husband with
regard to the family dispute and a case has been registered in Crime No.349
of 2021 on the file of the respondent police for the offences under Sections
294(b), 323 IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of
Women Act, 2002.
3. Today, the complainant's father Mruthraman is present and stated that
the dispute between the parties settled out of Court and his daughter married
someone three days back and therefore, he need not want to continue the
prosecution.
4.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.10906 of 2022
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's father
were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by
Mr.R.Babu, SSI, C2 Subramaniyapuram Police Station, Madurai. 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
294(b), 323 IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of
Women 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10906 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 Crime No.349 of 2021 pending before the first respondent
police, 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 Crime No.349 of 2021 on the file of the first
respondent police, is quashed insofar as the petitioner alone and the terms of
joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
20.06.2022
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non speaking order
trp
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Subramaniyapuram Police Station,
Madurai 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.10906 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
trp
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10906 of 2022
20.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
