Madras High Court
Gajendra Prabhu vs State Represented By Its on 12 February, 2024
Author: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Bench: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1709 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 12.02.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
CRL.O.P (MD) No.1709 of 2024
Gajendra Prabhu ...Petitioner
vs
1.State represented by its
The Inspector of Police,
Pathamadai Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
2.Pitchai Mohaideen
3.Sulekal Banu ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying, to call for the records relating to Cr.No.13 of 2024, dated
15.01.2024 on the file of the first Respondent Police and to quash to same.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sathya Chidambaram
For R1 : Mr.M.Veeranthiran
Government Advocate (crl.side)
For R2 and R3 :Mr.N.Saravanan
****
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1709 of 2024
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition had been filed seeking to quash the FIR in Cr.No.13 of 2024 pending on the file of the first Respondent Police.
2.Mr.S.Sathya Chidambaram, learned Counsel, who filed vakalat on behalf of the Petitioner/Accused, Mr.M.Veeranthiran, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing on behalf of the first Respondent and Mr.N.Saravanan, learned Counsel, who filed vakalat on behalf of the second Respondent are present in Court.
3.The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is arrayed as sole Accused in Cr.No.13 of 2024 pending on the file of the first Respondent. Pending investigation, the Accused and the De-Facto Complainant had arrived at an amicable settlement. A joint compromise memo had also been filed before this Court by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel for the second Respondent/De-Facto Complainant.
4.The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) on instructions from 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1709 of 2024 the first Respondent submitted that the compromise arrived at between the parties are bona fide.
3.The Sub Inspector of Police, Pathamadai Police Station, Tirunelveli District, is also present in Court. He had filed a status report of the Inspector of Police, Pathamadai Police Station, Tirunelveli District, in which, it is stated that during the pendency of the investigation, the accused and the De- Facto Complainant had arrived at an amicable settlement.
4.In the light of the status report filed by the first Respondent, the joint compromise memo filed by the parties concerned is recorded. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the FIR in Cr.No.13 of 2024 pending on the file of the first Respondent Police is quashed.
Internet :Yes/No 12.02.2024
Index :Yes/No
NCC :Yes/No
cmr
To
3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1709 of 2024
The Inspector of Police,
Pathamadai Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
cmr
CRL.O.P (MD) No.1709 of 2024
4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.1709 of 2024
12.02.2024
5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis