Back
2017 Supreme(Mad) 2058
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S.S. SUNDAR, J.
Mani & Ors. - Petitioners
Vs.
State rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police & Anr. - Respondents
Crl. O.P. (MD) No. 10283 of 2017
Decided On : 07-08-2017
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings
Act Referred
Headnote
Quash Petition - Criminal Proceedings - The court quashed the criminal proceedings based on a joint compromise memo filed by the parties, indicating that they had settled the dispute outside the court amicably.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a petition to quash the entire proceedings in Crime No. 152 of 2017, which involved charges under Sections 294(b), 387, and 506(ii) of IPC. The parties had settled the dispute outside the court and filed a joint compromise memo.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had settled the dispute amicably and were not interested in prosecuting the case. After verifying the identities of the parties and confirming their willingness to sign the joint compromise memo, the court quashed the criminal proceedings.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court should quash the criminal proceedings based on the joint compromise memo and the parties' willingness to settle the dispute outside the court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the joint compromise memo and the parties' unequivocal expression of their willingness to settle the matter outside the court. The court considered that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending.
Final Decision: The Criminal Original petition was allowed, and the criminal proceedings pending in Crime No.152 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent Police were quashed in toto based on the joint compromise memo signed by the parties.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. T. Senthilkumar
For the Respondents: Mr. K. Anbarasan, Mr. P. Jeyasankar
This Criminal Original petition is filed to call for records and quash the entire proceedings in Crime No. 152 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent Police against the petitioners.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.
3. On the basis of complaint received from the second respondent, a case was registered in Crime No. 152 of 2017 as against the petitioners/A1 to A3 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 387 and 506(ii) of IPC on the file of the first respondent Police.
4. It appears that parties viz., petitioners and the de facto complainant have settled the dispute outside the Court amicably. A joint compromise memo has been filed before this Court along with quash petition. As per the joint compromise memo, the petitioners as well as the defacto complainant have compromised the matter between them and the second respondent is not interested in prosecuting the case against the petitioners.
5. The parties appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed in the Joint Compromise Memo on their own will and volition. The identities of the parties are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this Court. The identities of the parties are also confirmed by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) through the first respondent police.
6. Having regard to the terms of the joint memo of compromise, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence the criminal proceedings pending in Crime No.152 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent Police, is quashed in toto and the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original petition is allowed.
