Madras High Court
N.Gopalakrishnan vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 29 May, 2023
Author: D.Nagarjun
Bench: D.Nagarjun
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on 29.08.2023
Delivered on 11.09.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023
N.Gopalakrishnan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Sub Inspector of Police,
Asaripallam Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
(Crime No.55/2023) ... 1st Respondent/
Complainant
2. S.Ramalakshmi ... 2nd Respondent /
Defacto complainant
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the entire records relating to the FIR
in Crime No.55 of 2023 dated 29.05.2023 pending on the file of the first
respondent police and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.C.S.Lenin
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023
For Respondents : Mr.SS.Madhavan
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
for R1
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking quashment of First Information Report (FIR) in Crime No.55 of 2023 on the file of the first respondent police.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.10.2022, the petitioner and others trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant, damaged the house gate and abused her in filthy language. It is stated that a civil suit in O.S.No.128 of 2022 has also been filed the parties which is stated to have been pending before the II-Additional District Munsiff Court, Nagercoil.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that without conducting an inquiry and basing on a complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.55 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 427, 294(b), 323, 234, 506(ii) 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023 of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act.
4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner/accused as well as the second respondent/defacto complainant that the parties have compromised the disputes between them amicably before the High Court Legal Services Committee attached to this Court and the settlement agreement duly signed by the parties and also by their respective counsel has been filed before this Court. However, the question is whether this Court can permit the petitioner to compromise and basing on such compromise, whether the criminal case against the petitioner in Crime No.55 of 2023 can be quashed.
5. In the case of Ramgopal and Ors. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in 2021 (6) CTC 240, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reiterated the exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non- compoundable offences. The relevant paragraphs read as under:-
"18. It is now a well crystalized axiom that plenary jurisdiction of this Court to impart complete justice under 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023 Article 142 cannot ipso facto be limited or restricted by ordinary statutory provisions. It is also noteworthy that even in the absence of an express provision akin to Section 482 Cr.P.C. conferring powers on the Supreme Court to abrogate and set aside criminal proceedings, the jurisdiction exercisable under Article 142 of the Constitution embraces this Court with scopious powers to quash criminal proceedings also, so as to secure complete justice. In doing so, due regard must be given to the overarching objective of sentencing in the criminal justice system, which is grounded on the sub-lime philosophy of maintenance of peace of the collective and that the rationale of placing an individual behind bars is aimed at his reformation.
19. We thus sumup and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences ‘compoundable’ within the statutory framework, the extra- ordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023 powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations."
6. The High Court Legal Services Committee attached to this Court was directed to verify the identities of the defacto complainant and the accused with reference to the acceptable identity cards like Aadhar Card etc. and also make an informal inquiry as to whether the defacto complainant has been accepting for compromise voluntarily. Accordingly, the Officer incharge of the High Court Legal Services Committee/ Registrar (Judicial) sent a report after verifying their identities. The accused in this case were charged with the offences under Sections 448, 427, 294(b), 323, 234, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act. This incident allegedly happened due to the civil dispute between the parties which is stated to be pending before the learned II- 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023 Additional District Munsiff, Nagercoil. Considering the above, this Court is satisfied with the requirement mentioned in the report.
7. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even if the contents of FIR are accepted to be true, there are no grounds to hold that the petitioner has committed the offences under Sections 448, 427, 294(b), 323, 234, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act. According to the petitioner there was no intention on the part of the petitioners to intimidate the defacto complainant criminally and that there is no material that the defacto complainant has suffered injuries in the hands of the petitioner. Further, the offences alleged against the petitioner are not also grievous in nature and they are also not the offences affecting the society, in fact, these offences took place on account of sudden provocation. However, defacto complainant and the petitioner are coming forward to settle their disputes amicably. In case if trial is conducted, the defacto complainant and others required to appear before the Court to give evidence against the petitioner thereby irrespective of the fact whether the petitioner or the defacto complainant, the animosity between them will continue. When both parties are coming 6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023 together to resolve the disputes amicably and wanted to compromise the criminal case and when it is not on account of coercion and undue influence, this Court is of the opinion that the compromise can be recorded in order to meed the complete justice. Accordingly, this compromise is recorded.
8. In view of the the settlement arrived between the parties, 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 Crime No. 55 of 2023 pending on the file of the first respondent police.
9. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the entire proceedings in Crime No.55 of 2023, pending on the file of the first respondent police is hereby quashed. The compromise memo is recorded and the same shall form part of this order.
11.09.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
PKN
7/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023
To
1. The Sub Inspector of Police,
Asaripallam Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
8/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023
DR.D.NAGARJUN,J
PKN
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14039 of 2023
Dated: 11.09.2023
9/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis