Madras High Court
M.Dinesh @ Alaguraja vs The State Rep. By on 21 June, 2022
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10973 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.10973 of 2022
1.M.Dinesh @ Alaguraja
2.Velmurugan ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2
Vs.
1.The State rep. by
The Sub Inspector of Police,
Rayappanpatti Police Station,
Rayappanpatti Post,
Theni District.
(Cr.No.108 of 2022) ...1st Respondent/Complainant
2.Thavamani ... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records pertaining to the case in Information Report
in Crime No.108 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent police and quash
the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Karuppasamy Pandian
For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthikumar
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R2 : Mr.K.Neelamegam
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10973 of 2022
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in
Crime No.108 of 2022, on the file of the first respondent police.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 17.04.2022 at about 1.00 p.m.
the second respondent/defacto complainant was standing in the first floor of
his house, the petitioners were looking the ground floor of the defacto
complainant house. When the defacto complainant questioned them, a
wordy quarrel arose between both the parties and the petitioners have
abused and attacked the defacto complainant and caused injuries and also
threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.
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.
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10973 of 2022
were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by
Mr.K.Ramalingam, SI of Police, Rayappanpatti Police Station, Theni
District. 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), 324, 506(ii) of IPC.
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 Crime No.108 of 2022 pending before the first respondent
police, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10973 of 2022
8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a
sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.108 of 2022 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.
21.06.2022
Internet:Yes./No
Index:Yes/no
vsd
To
1.The Sub Inspector of Police,
Rayappanpatti Police Station,
Rayappanpatti Post,
Theni District.
(Cr.No.108 of 2022)
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10973 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
vsd
ORDER IN
CRL.O.P (MD) No.10973 of 2022
21.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
