Recall petition after enjoying compromise benefits constitutes abuse of process and is not maintainable.

ORDER

R.Dharmalingam, the petitioner herein, has approached this Court seeking to recall the order dated 10.11.2023 passed in Crl.R.C.No.1651 of 2023 and Crl.O.P.No.19688 of 2023. The petitioner further seeks to restore the order dated 01.09.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore, which took cognizance of the offence against the respondents and consequently restored the final report.

2. At the outset, this Court wants to record that this petition to recall appears to be conceived with all mischievous intent. The petitioner has attempted to invoke the goodwill of this Court by referring to an order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, however, the Apex Court had, in fact, declined to interfere the order passed by this Court that is now sought to be recalled.

3. To make it more specific, the order of this Court dated 10.11.2023 was based on a compromise entered into between the parties, including the petitioner herein, who appeared before this Court via video conferencing, was identified by counsel and explicitly agreed to an amicable settlement. Consequently, it was agreed that C.C.No.21480 of 2019 (taken cognizance by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate) the Protest Petition filed by the accused and also the civil suit pending on the file of the Sub Court, Coimbatore in O.S.No.72 of 2013 would all be withdrawn. Furthermore, it was agreed that the petitioner's son and daughter would each paid a sum of Rs.10 lakhs.

4. While the said compromise involved several terms including a criminal case and multiple litigations, a comprehensive settlement was arrived between the parties and was in fact acted upon. After the exchange of money and the withdrawal of various proceedings, the petitioner has now selectively filed this recall petition. He seeks restoration only in respect of the order challenging the cognizance taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, as well as the protest petition.

5. The prayer made in this recall petition is to restore the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, including the cognizance taken on the complaint. Having enjoyed the fruits of the compromise through his children, the petitioner has filed this petition to recall nearly two years later.

6. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that certain promises made by the respondents during settlement talks were not adhered and that the delay in approaching this Court was due to the pending appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

7. I do not find any genuineness in these submissions. If the petitioner’s plea was true and genuine, he should not have permitted his son and daughter to receive Rs.10 lakhs each as part of the compromise. He should have approached this Court immediately to seek redressal, if really there was any suppression of facts or fraud played on him.

8. Having fully participated in the settlement, endorsed the compromise before this Court through video conferencing and enjoyed the fruits of the compromise, the petitioner has taken his own time to file the present petition. This amounts to nothing but an abuse of the process of law. The petition seeking recall is therefore, not maintainable and accordingly, stands dismissed.