Balasaravanan @ Saravanan vs The State
2022 Latest Caselaw 10778 Mad

                                                                       Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11006 of 2022


                            BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                  DATED: 22.06.2022

                                                         CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

                                          CRL.O.P (MD) No.11006 of 2022

                     1. Balasaravanan @ Saravanan
                     2. Muthu Bemilan @ Muthu Bebilan
                     3. Abin
                     4. Balamanikandan
                     5. Rathishkumar @ Ratheesh                                  ... Petitioners/
                                                                                     Accused 1to5

                                                          Vs

                     1. The State, represented by its,
                        The Inspector of Police,
                        Pazhavoor Police Station,
                        Tirunelveli District.
                        (Crime No.125 of 2022)                                 ... 1st Respondent/
                                                                                   Complainant

                     2. Sathiskumar                                            ...2nd Respondent/
                                                                                  Defacto
                                                                                   Complainant

                     PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
                     praying to call for the entire records relating to the impugned FIR in Crime
                     No.125 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police and to quash the same.


                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                              Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11006 of 2022


                                        For Petitioners   : Mr.S.Vidhya Sagar

                                        For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar,
                                                          Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1
                                                          Mr.E.Johnson for R2


                                                            ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in

Crime No.125 of 2022, dated 16.05.2022, on the file of the first respondent.

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

the petitioners herein attacked the defacto complainant. Hence, the defacto

complainant lodged a complaint and for the same, an FIR had been

registered in Crime No.125 of 2022, for the offences under Sections 147,

294(b), 324, 323 and 506(1) of IPC.

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.The sixth accused Vimal is not in India and is in abroad. Hence, the

remaining accused Saravanan, Muthu Bemilan, Abin, Balamanikandan and

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11006 of 2022

Ratheesh have settled the matter with the defacto complainant/injured, out

of Court.

5.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

Mr.T.Suyambulingam, SSI of Police, Pazhavoor Police Station. This Court

also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to

an amicable settlement between themselves.

6.All the persons are relatives to each other, hence, the defacto

complainant does not want to continue the criminal proceedings against the

petitioners. Under these circumstances, continuing the criminal proceedings

against the petitioners would be of no use.

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 147, 294(b), 324, 323 and 506(1) of IPC.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11006 of 2022

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.125 of 2022 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 sequel, the proceedings in Crime No125 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.

22.06.2022 Internet:Yes./No Index:Yes/no csm

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11006 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.11006 of 2022

V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

csm

ORDER IN CRL.O.P (MD) No.11006 of 2022

22.06.2022

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