Allowed

S.Raja @ Raja Mohamed v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 Nov 2013CRL OP(MD)/14970/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a petition under S. 482 CrPC to quash a charge sheet in respect of petitioners/accused. A memorandum of compromise was filed showing the parties are neighbours maintaining a cordial relationship, and the proceedings were quashed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

All proceedings in C.C.No.80 of 2010 in respect of the petitioners shall stand quashed.

S.Raja @ Raja Mohamed Vs the Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.11.2013 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM

¶4

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14970 of 2013

¶5

1.S.Raja @ Raja Mohamed

2.S.Sahul Hameed

3.S.Hakkeem @ Raja

4.M.Peer Mohamed

... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 4

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.State through The Inspector of Police, Mathichiyam Police Station, Madurai. ... 1st Respondent/Complainant

¶12

2.A.Sulthan Alavudheen ... 2nd Respondent/De-facto

¶13

Complainant

¶14

Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to charge sheet in C.C.No.80 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai and quash the same.

¶15

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Pandi Maharaja For Respondent 1 : Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Respondent 2 : Mr.C.M.Arumugam

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This petition seeks to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.80 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai so far as this petitioners/accused are concerned.

¶18

2.The petitioners are all facing prosecution for offence under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) I.P.C, in C.C.No.80 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai.

¶19

Presently a memorandum of compromise entered into between the petitioners and the second respondent/de-facto complainant stands filed informing that they are all neighbours and are enjoying a cordial relationship, which they wish to maintain. The memo of compromise filed before this court has been signed both by all the petitioners and the second respondent as also their respective counsel.

¶20

Following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, this Court allows this petition. Accordingly, all proceedings in C.C.No.80 of 2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai in respect of these petitioners shall stand quashed.

¶21

¶22

This petition is ordered accordingly. The memo of compromise shall form part of the records.

¶23

Sd/Assistant Registrar \True copy\

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

Enclosed the Joint compromise memo

¶26

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai . 2.-do-thro' The Judicial Magistrate, Madurai 3.The Inspector of Police, Mathichiyam Police Station, Madurai. 4.The Addl. Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai.

¶27

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.14970 of 2013 18.11.2013

¶28

¶29

NA/28/11/2013/P2/5C

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Raja @ Raja Mohamed v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Raja @ Raja Mohamed v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saravanan Vs the Sub-Inspector of Police

P. Vetrivel Vs the Inspector of Police

Nehru Vs the Inspector of Police

H.Bismi Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Sahul Hameed Vs the Inspector of Police

Chandrasekaran Vs the Inspector of Police