Petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings under CrPC 482 after entering a compromise with the second respondent involving payment of settlement sums. The court recorded affidavits confirming the settlement and quashed the proceedings.
Proceedings in C.C.No.54 of 2015 before Judicial Magistrate, Sirkali 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 : 09.06.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
Crl.O.P.No.25424 of 2016
1.Balaji
2.Jambulingam
3.Indumathi
4.Anuradha
5.Aiswarya
[ Petitioners ]
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station, Sirkali.
2. Preethi Selvaraj [Respondents]
Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.54 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Sirkali and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.H.Nazirudeen For Respondents : Mr.C.Emalias, Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi for R2
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.54 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Sirkali.
2.When this Criminal Original Petition was taken up, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the second respondent, have filed separate affidavits on behalf of the first petitioner as well as the second respondent/ defacto complainant, respectively. In both these affidavits, it is stated that they have entered into a compromise and the dispute between them has been settled out of Court. It is stated that as per the compromise, a total sum of Rs.35,00,000/-
(Rupees Thirty Five Lakhs Only) has been agreed to be paid by the first petitioner to the second respondent as full and final settlement, and accordingly, the first petitioner paid a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- by cash, a sum of Rs.14,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft dated 03.06.2017 bearing No.502181 drawn on ICICI Bank Limited, and a sum of Rs.6,00,00/- by way of Demand Draft dated 03.06.2017 bearing No.631954, drawn on Karur Vysya Bank, to the second respondent. The second respondent/ defacto complainant has also stated in her affidavit that in view of the compromise, the proceedings in C.C.No.54 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Sirkali may be quashed.
3.Both the parties are present and their identities have been verified.
4.The affidavits filed by the first petitioner and the
second respondent are recorded. In view of the above affidavits
filed by the first petitioner and the second respondent, the
proceedings in C.C.No.54 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Sirkali is quashed, and the Criminal Original
Petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
KM
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Sirkali.
2. The Judicial Magistrate, Sirkali.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court,
Chennai-600 104.
+1 CC to M/s. P. Haribabu, Advocate sr 41528
Crl.O.P.No.25424 of 2016 NRI(CO) sp/20/6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings initiated in C.C.No.54 of 2015 can be quashed in the light of an extra-judicial compromise between the parties.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Balaji
Jambulingam
Indumathi
Anuradha
Aiswarya
The State of Tamil Nadu
R. Mahadevan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
