Madras High Court
A.Alexander vs State Represented By on 9 September, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15934 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 09.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15934 of 2022
1. A.Alexander,
2. Athipathi Raja,
: Petitioners
Vs
1. State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Thallakulam Police Station,
Madurai District.
(In Crime No.313/2022)
2. P.Suresh Kannan,
: Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying
this Court to call for the records pertaining to FIR in Crime No.313/2022,
under Sections 341, 294(b), 324, 506(2) of IPC and Section 5 of Tamil Nadu
Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 registered on
16.4.2022 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same as illegal as
against the petitioner/accused.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15934 of 2022
For Petitioners : Mr.Subathra Devi P,
For R1 : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan,
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R2 : Mr.Vignesh
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in
Crime No.313/2022, on the file of the first respondent.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners stopped the defacto
complainant's auto and involved in wordy quarrel. Further, they caused
damages to his auto. 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 were also
present in person before this Court and they were identified by the learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15934 of 2022
Counsels appearing for the parties. 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 341,
294(b), 324, 506(2) of IPC and Section 5 of Tamil Nadu Public Property
(Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992.
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.313/2022, on the file of the first respondent, even
though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15934 of 2022
8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a
sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.313/2022, on the file of the first
respondent, is quashed insofar as the petitioners alone and the terms of joint
compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
09.09.2022
Internet:Yes
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non speaking order
LR/PNM
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Thallakulam 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.15934 of 2022
G.ILANGOVAN, J.
LR/PNM
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15934 of 2022
09.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
