This Criminal Original petition has been filed to quash the records in Crime No.14 of 2016 on the file of the second respondent.
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 the complaint given by the second respondent, against the petitioners, a case was registered in Crime No.14 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent for the offences punishable under
Sections 498(A),506(ii) and
294(b) of I.P.C. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 5 in Crime No.14 of 2016. The first petitioner is the husband of the second respondent and other petitioners are the in of the second respondent and relatives of first petitionier.
4.It appears that on the advise of elders and friends, the petitioners and the second respondent have settled their dispute amicably out of Court and they have also entered into a compromise. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 21.08.2017, signed by both parties, in the presence of their respective counsel, is also filed. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has given her consent to quash the entire proceedings in Crime No.14 of 2016 in favour of 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 identity of the parties are verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties before this Court. The identity of the parties are also confirmed by the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) through the first respondent police, except the fourth petitioner whose name though wrongly shown in the F.I.R as Prasnadevi, it is represented that her actual name is Prasanadevi. The fact was verified and confirmed by the second respondent.
6.Having regard to the compromise arrived at between the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. As per the Compromise Memo signed by the parties, the de- facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has agreed to quash the proceedings against all accused. Hence the criminal proceedings in Crime No.14 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police, All Women Police Station, Alangulam, Tirunelveli District, is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original petition is allowed.
To The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town Police Station, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District.
.