Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Balasivam vs The State Represented By

Madras High Court|18 September, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the records relating to Cr.No.938 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police.
2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner 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 petitioner, a case was registered in Crime No.938 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b) and 323 of I.P.C. and under Section 4 of Tamilnadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.
4.It appears that on the advise of the elders and friends, the petitioner and the second respondent have agreed to compromise the matter out of Court. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 12.09.2017, signed by both parties, in the presence of their respective counsels, is also produced before this Court. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, the de-facto complainant, namely, the second respondent has given his consent to quash the entire proceedings in Cr.No.938 of 2016.
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.
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 the petitioners. Hence the criminal proceedings in Cr.No.938 of 2016 on the file of the Inspector of Police, South Police Station, Tuticorin 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, South Police Station, Tuticorin District..
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Balasivam vs The State Represented By

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
18 September, 2017