Madras High Court

CRL OP(MD)/24207/2016 of SENTHIL, Vs THE 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.24207 of 2016 1. Senthil 2. Selvan .. Petitioners/Accused -Vs- 1.State represented by the Inspector of Police, C5, Mandaikadu Police Station, Kanyakumari District ... 1st

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of theCode of Criminal Procedure, praying to call for the records inC.C.No.266 of 2012 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate,Eraniel, Kanyakumari District and quash the same.

This petition has been filed to call for the records inC.C.No.266 of 2012 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate,Eraniel, Kanyakumari District 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.101 of 2012 in C.C.No.266 of 2012 on thefile the learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, KanyakumariDistrict for offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 323 and 506(i)of IPC on the file of the first respondent.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/4. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, boththe petitioner as well as the second respondent are present beforethe petitioner as well as the second respondent are present before this Court and they categorically made a statement that thedispute between them have been settled amicably. They also fileda joint compromise memo dated 25.12.2016 duly signed by bothparties and counter signed by their respective Counsel. Thelearned Counsel for the second respondent also has no objectionto quash the proceedings in Cr.No.101 of 2012 in C.C.No.266 of2012 on the file the learned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel,Kanyakumari District.

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.101of 2012 in C.C.No.266 of 2012, on the file the learned JudicialMagistrate, Eraniel, Kanyakumari District is hereby quashed andthe Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The compromise memodated 25.12.2016 shall form part of the order.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar(Writs)

/True copy/

Encl:Joint The compromise memo xerox copy Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Inspector of Police, C5, Mandaikadu Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

2. The Judicial Magistrate,Eraniel,Kanyakumari District.

3. The Additional Public ProsecutorMadurai Bench of Madras High Court,Madurai.+1 cc to M/s.R.J.Karthik, Advocate, SR.No.83772AA/5c/3p/11.01.2017

Page 1 of 1

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead