Madras High Court
CRL OP(MD)/24209/2016 of SURESH KUMAR @ SURESH, Vs THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, on 29 December 2016
BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.12.2016 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.24209 of 2016 Sureshkumar @ Suresh .. Petitioners/Accused -Vs- 1.State represented by the Sub Inspector of Police, Alagappapuram Police Station, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. ... 1st
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 29.12.2016
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.24209 of 2016
Sureshkumar @ Suresh .. Petitioners/Accused -Vs-
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. State represented by the Sub Inspector of Police, Alagappapuram Police Station, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. ... 1[st] Respondent/Complainant
2. Gnana Shanmugam @ Gnanam ... 2[nd] Respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of theCode of Criminal Procedure, praying to call for the records andquash the proceedings in Crime No.89/2016 on the file of the firstrespondent herein and quash the same.
For Petitioners: Mr.N. Jeyaram SidharthFor Respondents: Mr. P. Kandasamy - R1 Government Advocate (Crl. Side) M/s. Chettinad Legal Solutions-R2O R D E R
This petition has been filedto call for the records andquash the proceedings in Crime No.89/2016 on the file of the firstrespondent herein and quash the same.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and thePublic Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent.
3. Based on the complaint given by the secondrespondent/defacto complainant, a case has been registered againstthe petitioner in Cr.No.89 of 2016 for offences under Sections 323and 506(i) of IPC on the file of the first respondent. The saidF.I.R. is challenged before this Court.
4. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, boththe petitioner as well as the second respondent are present beforethis Court and they categorically made a statement that thedispute between them have been settled amicably. They also fileda joint compromise memo dated 28.12.2016 duly signed by bothhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/parties and counter signed by their respective Counsel. Thelearned Counsel for the second respondent also has no objection to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.89 of 2016.
5. In view of the statements made by the parties and thejoint compromise memo filed by them, no fruitful purpose will beachieved to proceed further in this matter.6.In view of that, the impugned proceedings in Cr.No.89 of2016, on the file of the first respondent is hereby quashed andthe Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Thecompromisememo dated 28.12.2016 shall form part of the order.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To:
(**)Compromise Memo is annexed to this Order
1. Sub Inspector of Police, Alagappapuram Police Station, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
+1 cc to Mr. RM.ARUN SWAMINATHAN, Advocate, Sr.No: 83788
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.24209 of 2016
29.12.2016
trp-MS/09.01.2017/2P4C