The court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 467, 468, and 420 IPC following an amicable settlement and voluntary consent of the elderly complainant, confirmed by a police-recorded statement.
The entire proceedings in Cr.No.1646 of 2014 and the connected miscellaneous petition against the petitioners are 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 24.06.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
CRL.OP.No.9671 of 2015
and MP.No.1 of 2015
1.P.Thanga Thirupathi @ Thirupathi
2.Lakshmi Prabha
3.T.Praveen Kumar 4.T.Hemaraj
... Petitioners/Accused
Vs
1.The Inspector of Police, N1, Royapuram Police Station, Chennai-13.
2.Unnamalai Ammal ... Respondents/Complainant & defacto Complainant
Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records in Cr.No.1646 of 2014 pending before the 1st respondent and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.Kannan
For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias, Addl. Public Prosecutor [for R1]
This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.1646 of 2014 on the file of the 1st respondent.
”nkYk; ehd; bfhLj;j fphpkpdy; tHf;fhd ,.j.rh gphpt[ 467/ 468 kw;Wk; 420 Fw;w vz;.1646_2014 jw;nghJ N1 uhag[uk; fhty; epiyak; brd;id-600 013y; epYitapy; cs;sJ. ehd; me;j tHf;fpid thg!; bra;J mjd; kPJ nky; eltof;if njitapy;iy vd rkhjhd cld;gof;ifapy; TwpapUf;fpnwd;.
Mifahy; nkw;go kDjhuh;fs; vdf;F kfd; kw;Wk; nguf;FHe;ijfs; vd;w cwtpid kdjpy; bfhz;Lk;/ nkYk; 5.1.2015 njjpapl;l rkhjhd xg;ge;j cld;gof;ifapd; nghpYk; nkw;go fphpkpdy; tHf;fpid vdJ kdg;g{h;;tkhft[k;/ ahUila J}z;LjYkpd;wpa[k; thg!; bgw;Wf; bfhs;s rk;kjpf;fpnwd;/ me;j Fw;w tHf;F vz;.1646_2014 kPJ ve;j tpj nky; eltof;ifa[k; njitapy;iy vdt[k;/ mij fdk; ePjpkd;wk; uj;J bra;a cj;jutpl ntz;Lbkd;Wk; mjw;F vdf;F ve;j tpj Ml;nrgida[k; ,y;iybad;Wk; ,jd; \yk; cWjpaspf;fpnwd;. ”
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
To
1.The Inspector of Police, N1, Royapuram Police Station,Chennai-13.
2.The Public Prosecutor,High Court, Madras.
+2 cc to Mr.K.Kannan, Advocate,SR.31017.
Ctk(co)
krd 1/7 CRL.OP.No.9671 of 2015
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Sections 467, 468, and 420 IPC should be quashed in light of the settlement between the complainant and accused.
Whether the consent of an elderly complainant for quashing proceedings can be relied upon without her physical presence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Narinder Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and AnotherRelied on¶25
Narinder Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another reported in [2014] 6 SCC 466 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
1.P.Thanga Thirupathi @ Thirupathi
2.Lakshmi Prabha
3.T.Praveen Kumar
4.T.Hemaraj
1.The Inspector of Police, N1, Royapuram Police Station, Chennai
2.Unnamalai Ammal
P.N. Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
