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

K.Hariramajeyam vs State Rep. By

Madras High Court|05 October, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This Criminal Original petition is filed to call for the records of the charge sheet in C.C.No.95 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Vilathikulam, Thoothukudi District and quash the same.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.
3. The petitioner is the sole accused in Criminal Proceedings in C.C.No.95 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vilathikulam. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the second respondent / de facto complainant, a case was registered by the first respondent police in Crime No.32 of 2017 for the offences under Sections 294(b),506(ii) and 352 of IPC against the petitioner. Thereafter, the first respondent police has filed a charge sheet before the the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vilathikulam and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.95 of 2017.
4. It appears that parties viz., petitioner and the second respondent / de facto complainant have settled their dispute amicably out of Court, at the instigation of the elders and well wishers and they have also entered into a compromise. A joint compromise memo signed by the parties concerned in the presence of their respective counsels is produced before this Court.
5. As per the joint compromise memo, the petitioner and the second respondent, who have appeared before this Court have stated in unequivocal terms that the Joint Compromise Memo was signed by them on their own will and volition. The identities 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 Additional Public Prosecutor through the first respondent Police.
6. In the Compromise Memo, the de facto complainant has agreed to withdraw the criminal case and the petitioner and the second respondent have requested this Court to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.95 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vilathikulam, Thoothukudi District
7. In the said circumstances, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence, on the basis of the compromise memo signed by the parties, the Criminal Original petition is allowed and the proceedings pending in C.C.No.95 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Vilathikulam, Thoothukudi District is quashed in toto. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.
To
1. The Inspector of Police, Masarpatti Police Station, Masarpatti.
2. The Judicial Magistrate, Vilathikulam, Thoothukudi District
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
.
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

K.Hariramajeyam vs State Rep. By

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
05 October, 2017