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

Vijay Anantham vs State Represented By

Madras High Court|15 November, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This Criminal Original petition is filed for quashing the First Information Report in Crime No.118 of 2016 pending on the file of the first respondent/Sub-Inspector of Police, Kadupatty Police Station, Madurai District.
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 first accused in Crime No.118 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the second respondent/de-facto complainant, a case was registered in Crime No.118 of 2016, dated 09.06.2016, for the alleged offences under Sections 147,341,294(b),323,427 and 379 of I.P.C.
4. It appears that the parties, namely, the petitioner and the second respondent have settled their dispute amicably out of Court, at the intervention of elders and family members. The parties also have entered into a compromise. A Joint Compromise Memo, dated 01.11.2017, signed by the petitioner and the de-facto complainant in the presence of the learned counsel for the petitioner is produced before this Court. As per the Joint Compromise memo, the second respondent himself requested this Court to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.118 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent based upon the compromise.
5. Today the parties, namely, the petitioner and the second respondent appeared before this Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their own free 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 Additional Public Prosecutor through the first respondent police.
6. Having regard to the specific terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, this Court is of the view that no useful or fruitful purpose will be served by keeping this matter pending. Hence, on the basis of the Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties, the Criminal Original petition is allowed and the First Information Report in Crime No.118 of 2016 on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed in respect of the petitioner herein. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties shall form part of the order.
To
1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kadupatty Police Station, Madurai District.
2.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

Vijay Anantham vs State Represented By

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
15 November, 2017