The Court quashed the FIR in Crime No. 4 of 2015 under Sections 498-A, 294(b), 341, and 506(i) IPC following a compromise between the petitioners and the second respondent. The Criminal Original Petition was allowed.
Quashed the entire proceedings in Crime No. 4 of 2015 in respect of the petitioners alone and allowed the Criminal Original Petition.
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: 06.04.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA
Crl.O.P.No.21902 of 2015
and M.P.No.1 of 2015
1.P.Bharanidaran
2.P.Parivallal
3.K.Kanchanna ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.State rep.by
The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Krishnagiri.
2.P.Selvi ... Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records and quash the FIR in Crime No.4 of 2015 pending on the file of the 1st respondent.
For Petitioners :Mr.A.Mohamed Ismail
For Respondent 1:Mr.C.Emalias
Additional Public Prosecutor for R1
For Respondent 2: Mr.P.Ramesh
O R D E R
This petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.4 of 2015 pending on the file of the 1st respondent.
2.It is seen that the alleged offences attributed against the petitioners are under Sections 498-A, 294(b), 341 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners and the second respondent appeared in person and their identification is also verified by this Court and the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the second https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondent filed a memo of compromise stating that since the
matter has been compromised, the second respondent agreed to quash the above said FIR in Crime No.4 of 2015 pending on the file of the 1st respondent.
Considering the nature of allegation and also considering the memo of compromise filed by the petitioners and the second respondent, the entire proceedings in Crime No.4 of 2015 pending on the file of the 1st respondent, in respect of the petitioners alone is, hereby, quashed and this Criminal Original Petition is allowed accordingly. The joint compromise memo shall form part of the order of this Court. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mps
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Krishnagiri.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court,
Madras.
+1 cc to Mr.P.Ramesh, Advocate, sr.21854
+ 1 cc to Mr.A.Mohamed Ismail, Advocate SR 22422[5/5/16]
Crl.O.P.No.21902 of 2015
and M.P.No.1 of 2015
lrs co
kra 27.04.2016
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to quash the FIR in Crime No. 4 of 2015 on the filing of a compromise memo.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P. Bharanidaran
P. Parivallal
K. Kanchanna
State represented by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Krishnagiri
P. Selvi
M. Mala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
