Madras High Court
Kadar Mohideen @ Kadar Mohideen ... vs State Through on 5 January, 2023
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19678 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 05.01.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19678 of 2022
1.Kadar Mohideen @ Kadar Mohideen Hanifa
2.Kismath Ali
3.Ithayattulla
4.Ummal Habeeba @ Ummal Habeeba Kader Maideen
5.Amsath Beevi
6.Anish Fathima @ Anish Fathima Ithayathulla
7.Regumath Nisha
8.Kaliba @ Mohamed Kaliba ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.State through
The Inspector of Police,
Thiruvadanai Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
(Crime No.152 of 2015)
2.Naina Mohamed ... Respondents
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19678 of 2022
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the entire records connected to
PRC.No.15 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court,
Thiruvadanai and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Madhan Kumar
For R1 : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For R2 : Mr.S.A.Ajmal Khan
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section
482 Cr.P.C., seeking orders to call for the records pertaining to the
proceedings in PRC.No.15 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Thiruvadanai and quash the same.
2. The case of the prosecution is that there existed some dispute
between the second respondent/defacto complainant and the first
petitioner, due to which, the petitioners and the other accused assaulted
the second respondent and also scolded him in filthy language.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19678 of 2022
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit
that the second respondent has lodged a complaint before the first
respondent and on that basis, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.152
of 2015 and after investigation and filing of the final report, the same
was taken cognizance in PRC.No.15 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Thiruvadanai against nine persons including the petitioners
herein for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 352, 323,
506(1), 307 and 149 IPC. He would further submit that pending FIR the
fourth accused Amir Ali died on 16.01.2016 and has produced the copy
of the death certificate.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing
for the first respondent would submit that the second respondent/defacto
complainant has suffered simple injury. He would further submit that
when the charge sheet was filed, the fourth accused was not alive.
5. The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have
decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably
among themselves.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19678 of 2022
6. 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 counsels. The petitioners and the second
respondent are present before this Court and and they were identified by
Mr.G.Poomuthu, Training Sub Inspector, Thiruvadanai Police Station,
Ramnad District as well as by the learned 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.
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 Sections147, 148, 294(b), 352, 323, 506(1), 307 and 149
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19678 of 2022
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 PRC.No.15 of 2017 pending before the
Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvadanai, even though, the offences involved
are not compoundable in nature.
10. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and
the proceedings in PRC.No.15 of 2017, on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Thiruvadanai, is quashed and the joint compromise memo
shall form part and parcel of this order.
05.01.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
csm
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate,
Thiruvadanai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Thiruvadanai Police Station,
Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19678 of 2022
K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.
csm
Order made in
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19678 of 2022
Dated: 05.01.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
