Thangapandian vs The State Represented By on 7 November, 2017

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 07.11.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

Crl.O.P.(MD) No.14233 of 2017

1.Thangapandian
2.Santhanam
3.Gomathi
4.Pandiammal … Petitioners / Accused No.1 to 4

-Vs-

1.The State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Virudhunagar.
(in Crime No.3 of 2017) …1st Respondent
/ Complainant

2.Selvarani …2nd Respondent
/ De-facto complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in Cr.No.3 of 2017 on the file of
the All Women Police Station, Virudhunagar District and consequently accept
the compromise arrived at between both the Accused and the de-facto
complainant to compound the case quash the same.

!For Petitioners : Mr.N.Mohideen Basha
^For R1 : Mr.K.S.Duraipandian
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R2 :Mr.P.Chandrasekar
:ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records
in Cr.No.3 of 2017 on the file of the All Women Police Station, Virudhunagar
District and consequently accept the compromise arrived at between both the
Accused and the de-facto complainant to compound the case quash the same.

2.Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and the
learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent.

3.The petitioners are accused No.1 to 4 in Crime.No.3 of 2017. Based on
the complaint lodged by the second respondent, as against the petitioners, a
case was registered in Crime.No.3 of 2017 for the alleged offences under
Sections 498A 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 and
Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act 2002. After
filing the First Information Report, the case was taken on file by the All
Women Police Station, Virudhunagar District, in Crime No.3 of 2017.

4.It appears that the parties have settled their dispute amicably, at
the intervention of elders and well wishers and they have also entered into a
compromise. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 10.10.2017, signed by both
parties, in the presence of their respective counsel, is also produced before
this Court. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the parties have stated that
they have agreed to compromise the issue and not to pursue the criminal
complaint further and the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent
has expressed his willingness for quashing the criminal proceedings in Crime
No.3 of 2017.

5.Today, the parties appeared before this Court and expressed in
unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their
own free will and volition. The identity of the parties are verified with
reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this
Court. The identity of the parties are also confirmed by the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor through the first respondent police.

6.As per the specific terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, this Court is
of the view that no useful or fruitful purpose will be served by keeping this
matter pending. Hence the criminal proceedings in Crime No.3 of 2017, on the
file of the All Women Police Station, Virudhunagar District, is quashed in
toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the
order.

8.Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

To

1.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Virudhunagar District.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.

.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *