Court quashed FIR under Section 482 CrPC after filing of joint compromise memo by parties. Case involved offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, and 506(ii) IPC regarding public gathering violence.
FIR in Crime No.243 of 2013 registered against petitioners under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 and 506(ii) IPC is quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.08.2013
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA Criminal Original Petition(MD) No.12401 of 2013
1.P.Dhanapal 2.R.Sarath Kumar 3.V.Rajesh 4.P.Arun 5.P.Saravanan 6.P.Mathan .. Petitioners Vs. 1.The Inspector of Police, Nagamalaiputhukottai Police Station, Madurai District Crime No.243 of 2013)
2.Sankar .. Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records and quash the F.I.R. in Crime No.243 of 2013 on the file of the 1st respondent police.
For Petitioners :Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah For R1 :Mr.P.Kandasamy,Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) For R2 : Party Appeared
O R D E R
The petitioners approach this Court with a prayer to call for the records in Crime No.243 of 2013 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.
2.The second respondent/de-facto complainant preferred a complaint against the petitioners and on the basis of the complaint, the case has been registered on 01.07.2013 in Crime No.243 of 2013 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 and 506(ii) of I.P.C.
3.Today, the petitioners 1 to 5 are present along with their identification cards. The sixth petitioner is present and he has produced the identification card, wherein his name shows as Vinoth. He would further submit that he is also known as Mathan and the defacto complainant has also identified that he knows the sixth petitioner. Today, both the petitioners and the second respondent had filed a joint compromise memo and the second respondent would submit that he has no objection to quash the F.I.R. in crime No.243 of 2013.
4.Considering the submissions on either side and considering https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the joint compromise memo filed by both the parties, and also considering the willingness of the second respondent, this Court is
2
of the opinion that the case registered against the petitioners is liable to be quashed and accordingly the case registered against the petitioners in Crime No.243 of 2013 on the file of the first respondent is hereby quashed. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.
Sd/-
Deputy Registrar
/True Copy/
Assistant Registrar
To
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12401 of 2013 12.08.2013
arul
SMA/22/08/2013/3C/2P
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC is liable to be quashed upon settlement of disputes.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P. Dhanapal and others
Inspector of Police, Nagamalaiputhukottai
Sankar
R. Mala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
