Madras High Court
Ananth @ Premananth vs The Deputy Superintendent Of Police on 4 September, 2024
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13408 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04.09.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13408 of 2024
1.Ananth @ Premananth
2.Alaguvel
3.Vignesh : Petitioners/A1 to A3
Vs.
1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Vilathikulam, Thoothukudi District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Tharuvaikularm Police Station,
Thoothukudi District.
Crime No.113 of 2016.
3.Raj ... Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to
call for the records in S.C.No.87 of 2020 on the file of the learned Sessions
Judge for SC/ST Act PCR Court, Thoothukudi and quash the same as
against the petitioners.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Moorthy
For Respondents : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
for R1 & R2.
: Mr.S.T.Sasidharan Tamilkani, for R3.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13408 of 2024
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482
Cr.P.C., seeking orders, to call for the records in S.C.No.87 of 2020 on the
file of the learned Sessions Judge for SC/ST Act PCR Court, Thoothukudi
and quash the same as against the petitioners.
2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel
between the petitioners and the defacto complainant, due to which, the
petitioners abused the defacto complainant in filthy language by using
caste name and also attacked him. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit
that the third respondent has lodged a complaint before the first respondent
and on that basis, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.113 of 2016 and
after investigation, filed the final report and the same was taken
cognizance in S.C.No.87 of 2020 on the file of the Sessions Court for
SC/ST Act Cases, Thoothukudi, for the offences under Sections 294(b),
323, 506(i), 325 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST
(POA) Act 2015, against the petitioners. He would further submit that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13408 of 2024
counter case in Crime No.112 of 2016 came to be registered against the
defacto complainant and the respondent police, after investigation, filed
the final report and the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No.613 of
2023.
4. The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have
decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among
themselves.
5. A Joint Memo of Compromise, dated 27.08.2024, has been filed
before this Court which have been signed by the petitioners and the third
respondent and also by their respective counsels. The petitioners and the
third respondent are present before this Court and and they were identified
by Mr.V.Subbiah, SSI, Tharuvaikularm Police Station, Thoothukudi
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.
6. 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13408 of 2024
Sections 294(b), 323, 506(i), 325 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and
3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act 2015.
7. The defacto complainant/third respondent has received the
compensation from the Government and now, he has returned the amount,
and also produced the E-Challan, dated 03.09.2024.
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 S.C.No.87 of 2020 as against the petitioners pending
before the file of the learned Sessions Judge for SC/ST Act PCR Court,
Thoothukudi, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in
nature.
10. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13408 of 2024
proceedings in S.C.No.87 of 2020 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge
for SC/ST Act PCR Court, Thoothukudi, is quashed as against the
petitioners and the joint compromise memo dated 27.08.2024, shall form
part and parcel of this order.
04.09.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
das
To
1.The Sessions Judge for SC/ST Act PCR Court,
Thoothukudi.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Vilathikulam, Thoothukudi District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Tharuvaikularm Police Station,
Thoothukudi District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13408 of 2024
K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.
das
Order made in
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13408 of 2024
Dated: 04.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
