Anand vs State Rep. By on 7 December, 2015

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Anand vs State Rep. By on 7 December, 2015

Bench: S.Vaidyanathan

        

 

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT               

DATED: 07.12.2015  

CORAM   
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN          

Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 23043 of 2015 

1. Anand 
2. Madan @ Madan Durai                  ... Petitioners/A1 & 2      

                                        Vs.

1.      State rep. by
        The Sub Inspector of Police,
        Karungal Police Station,
        Kanyakumari District.
        (Crime No.748 of 2012)          ... 1st Respondent / Complainant

2.      Samraj  ... 2nd Respondent / Defacto Complainant

Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to
call for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.48 of
2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Eraniel and quash the
same. 

!For Petitioners        :       Mr.M.R.Sreenivasan  
^For R1         :       Mrs.S.Prabha         
                                                Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)
                For R2          :       Mr.C.Deepak  


:ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.48 of 2013 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, pursuant to the amicable settlement effected between the parties.

2. It is seen that a case in Crime No.748 of 2012 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) IPC, has been registered against the petitioners/A1 and A2. After completion of the investigation, the 1st respondent has filed a charge sheet, which was duly taken on file in C.C.No.48 of 2013 by the Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.

3. When this matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners/A1 and 2 and the second respondent, appeared in persons and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the Government Advocate (Crl.Side) through the respondent Police.

4. The counsel appearing for the petitioners filed this quash petition along with a Joint Memo of Compromise dated 07.12.2015, duly stating that since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement by way of compromise among themselves, the second respondent has agreed for quashing of the above case in C.C.No.48 of 2013 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.

5. Considering the nature of allegations and also considering the memo of compromise dated 07.12.2015, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending. Therefore, the entire proceedings in C.C.No.48 of 2013 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel in respect of the petitioners/accused alone are hereby quashed.

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties. The joint memo of compromise dated 07.12.2015 shall form part of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.

2. The Sub Inspector of Police, Karungal Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

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

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court