Madras High Court
Ajithkumar @ Ajith vs The Inspector Of Police on 28 March, 2023
Author: G.Ilangovan
Bench: G.Ilangovan
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2814of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 28.03.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2814 of 2023
1.Ajithkumar @ Ajith
2.Sujithkumar @ Sujith ... Petitioners / Accused No. 2 & 3
Vs.
1.The Inspector of police
Eraniel Police Station,
Kanyakumari District
(In Crime No. 421 / 2017)
2. Selin Mary ... Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to the
impugned charge sheet in C.C. No. 196 of 2018 pending on the file of
the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, Kanyakumari District and
quash the same.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2814of 2023
For Petitioner : Mr.L. George Paul Anto
For R1 : Mr.S. Manikandan
Government Advocate (Crl Side)
For R2 : Mr.U.Muneeskumar
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the charge sheet in C.C. No. 196 of 2018 pending on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, Kanyakumari District.
2.The contention of the petitioners is that based on the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.421 of 2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 294(b), 323 and 506(i) of IPC, against the petitioners. It appears that there is a small issue between the parties.
3.The further contention of the petitioners is that they compromised the issue with the 2nd respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioners and the 2nd respondent and also by their respective counsels. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2814of 2023
4.The petitioners and the 2nd respondent appeared before this Court along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They were also identified by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and the Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Hence, the Compromise Memo is recorded.
5.Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners and also in view of the joint compromise memo, dated 10.03.2023, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and inclined to quash all further proceedings in C.C. No. 196 of 2018 pending on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, Kanyakumari District, in respect of the petitioners.
6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 196 of 2018 pending on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, Kanyakumari District, is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioners alone. The compromise memo is 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2814of 2023 recorded and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order.
28.03.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
tta
To
1. Learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, Kanyakumari District.
2.The Inspector of police Eraniel Police Station, Kanyakumari District
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2814of 2023 G.ILANGOVAN,J tta Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2814 of 2023 Dated : 28.03.2023 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis