Partly allowed

D.Selladurai v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC2 Mar 2015CRL OP(MD)/1295/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court allowed a Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge sheet. Considering a valid compromise memo and the corroboration of facts, the court quashed the proceedings in C.C.No.266 of 2014.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition was allowed and the proceedings in Criminal Caseness No.266 of 2014 were quashed. The compromise memo shall form part of the records.

D.Selladurai Vs the Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 02.03.2015

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1295 of 2015

¶7

1.D.Selladurai 2.Maheswari

¶8

3.Sellammal ..Petitioners/Accused 1 to 3

¶9

vs. State through by 1.The Inspector of Police, GH Police Station, In Crime No.302 of 2013, Trichy District. ..1^st Respondent/Complainant

¶10

2.Gurumoorthi ..2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complaiant

¶11

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the charge sheet in C.C.No.266 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy and quash the same.

¶12

For petitioners : Mr.M.Subash Babu For R-1 : Mr.K.V.Rajarajan Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.266 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy.

¶15

2.On a complaint given by the 2^nd respondent/defacto complainant, the 1^st respondent has registered a case in Crime No.302 of 2013 against the petitioners/ Accused, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 342, 324, 506(ii) of I.P.C. The case after investigation culminated in filing of charge sheet in C.C.No.266 of 2014 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy.

¶16

The parties are present before this Court and they are identified by the respective learned counsels and both the parties have filed a joint compromise memo stating that the matter in issue between them has been amicably resolved and therefore, the defacto complainant is not willing to prosecute the case.

¶17

The Court has also heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶18

Given the nature of offences, this Court accepts the compromise.

¶19

In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed the proceedings in C.C.No.266 of 2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy, is hereby quashed. The memo of compromise shall form part of the records.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶22

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

¶23

/True copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy.

¶27

2.The Inspector of Police, GH Police Station, Trichy District.

¶28

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶29

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1295 of 2015 02.03.2015

¶30

pm pbk 16/03/2015 ::2p-4c:

¶31

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

D.Selladurai v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Selladurai 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Balaji Vs E.Thilagam

Mrf Limited Vs Mrs.Ujjawal Sampath Chordia

Shanthi Vs the Superintendent of Police

Karupaiah Vs the Superintendent of Police

Rengarajan Vs the Inspector of Police

M.Balasubramanian Vs the Superintendent of Police