Madras High Court
Kishok @ Kishok Kumar vs The State Represented By Its on 23 June, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11115 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 23.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11115 of 2022
1. Kishok @ Kishok Kumar,
2. Nasren @ Jesu Nasren,
3. Dismon @ Joseph Prem Dismon,
4. Neppoliyan,
5. Vimal @ Sahaya Arul Vimal,
6. Arasu @ Valan Arasu,
7. Anton,
8. Reji,
9. Prabhu @ Sahaya Marshallin Prabhu,
: Petitioners
Vs
1. The State represented by its,
The Inspector of Police,
Koodankulam Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
Crime No.356/2020.
2. Kennedy,
: Respondents
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11115 of 2022
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
praying to call for the entire records in relating to the impugned charge
sheet in PRC No.1/2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate
Court, Radhapuram and its consequential proceedings and to quash the
same in so far as the petitioners are concerned.
For Petitioners : M/s.Vidya Sagar S,
For R1 : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar,
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R2 : Mr.Mariappan
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the Charge
Sheet in PRC No.1/2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate
Court, Radhapuram, for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148,
294(b), 323, 324, 307, 506(2), 325, 326 and 34 of IPC.
2.The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the
petitioners attacked the defacto complainant, abused with filthy language
and also gave a life threat. Hence, the complaint.
3.The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11115 of 2022
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 were also present in person before this Court and they were
identified by Mr.S.Karthikeyan, Koodankulam Police Station. 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 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 307, 506(2), 325, 326
and 34 of IPC.
6. The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11115 of 2022
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 PRC No.1/2022 on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate Court, Radhapuram, 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 PRC No.1/2022 on the file of the learned
Judicial Magistrate Court, Radhapuram, is quashed and the terms of joint
compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
23.06.2022
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
lr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11115 of 2022
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.11115 of 2022
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
lr
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11115 of 2022
23.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
