Madras High Court
Prabhu @ Sahaya Prabhu vs The State Rep. By on 21 June, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10918 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 21.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10918 of 2022 and
Crl.M.P(MD).No.6883 of 2022
1.Prabhu @ Sahaya Prabhu
2.Stephen
3.Santha Kurus
4.Pramilton
5.Anso @ Jesus Vinith Anso
6.Ajith
7.Mathan
8.Kamal
9.Abinav ...Petitioners
Vs.
1.The State rep. by
the Inspector of Police,
Koodankulam Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.357 of 2020)
2.Kishok Kumar ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call
for the entire records in relating to the impugned FIR in Crime No.357 of
2020 on the file of the 1st respondent police and its consequential proceedings
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10918 of 2022
and to quash the same in so far as the petitioners are concerned.
For Petitioners : Mr. M.S. Jeyakarthik
For 1st Respondent : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For 2nd respondent : Mr. S. Vidhya sagar
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in
Crime No.357 of 2020, on the file of the first respondent police.
2.The case of the prosecution is that due to the wordy quarrel arose
between the petitioners and the second respondent/defacto complainant, the
accused have assaulted the defacto complainant with deadly weapons. Hence,
a case has been registered against the petitioners in Crime No.357 of 2020 for
the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 427 and 506(ii) IPC.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the
accused Nos. 6, 9 and 11 viz., Thiliban, Prabakar, Rajilton respectively., are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10918 of 2022
in abroad. Except the said accused all are other accused have settled their
dispute out of the Court with the injured persons have and the injured do not
continue the criminal proceedings against the accused.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the
respondent police would submit that this is a case and counter case and a
counter case has been registered against the 2nd respondent herein in Crime
No.356 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324,
307, 427 and 506(i) IPC.
5.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.
6.A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court which
have been signed by the petitioners / accused 1 to 5, 7, 8, 10 and 12 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 counsel for the parties. This Court also enquired both
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10918 of 2022
the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable
settlement between themselves.
7.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, 332, 506(i) IPC.
8.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.
9.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.357 of 2020 pending before the first respondent
police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
10.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10918 of 2022
sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.357 of 2020 on the file of the first
respondent police, is quashed insofar as the petitioners alone and the terms of
joint compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
21.06.2022
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non speaking order
trp
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Koodankulam 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.10918 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
trp
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10918 of 2022 and
Crl.M.P(MD).No.6883 of 2022
21.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
