Allowed

R.Pavithra, v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC25 Oct 2018CRL OP(MD)/12551/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after parties filed a Joint Memo of Compromise. Citing Supreme Court guidelines, the court allowed the petitions despite the offences being non-compoundable.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings in C.C.Nos.7 and 220 of 2017 quashed; terms of Joint Memo of Compromise made part of the order.

R.Pavithra, Vs the Inspector of Police — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.10.2018

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Crl.O.P.[MD].Nos.12551 and 15614 of 2017 and 18802 of 2018 and

¶5

Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.8632, 8633, 10379 and 10380 of 2017 and 8393 of 2018

¶6

1.R.Pavithra 2.R.Kannan ... Petitioners / Accused Nos.6 and 7 in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12551 of 2017 M.Hawwa Jarina ... Petitioner / Accused No.7 in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15614 of 2017 1.Senthil Kumar 2.Ganapathy 3.Ramakani 4.Mallika 5.Sridevi ... Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 to 5 in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18802 of 2018 Vs. 1. State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thiruchendur. ...1^st Respondent / Complainant in all Crl.O.Ps. 2.Divya ... 2^nd Respondent / Defacto Complainant in all Crl.O.Ps.

¶7

COMMON PRAYER : Criminal Original Petitions are filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to call for the records relating to the proceedings in C.C.Nos.7 and 220 of 2017 now pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruchendur and to quash the same insofar as the petitioners are concerned.

¶8

For Petitioners : Ms.P.Jessi Jeeva Priya in all Crl.O.Ps. For R1 : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi Government Advocate [Crl. Side] in all Crl.O.Ps. For R2 : Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam in all Crl.O.Ps.

¶9

COMMON ORDER

¶10

These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.Nos.7 and 220 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruchendur.

¶11

2.The case is still in the stage of trial. By passage of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

¶12

¶13

3.A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court, which have been signed by the petitioners and the second respondent in all petitions and also by their respective counsel. In order to identify the respective parties, they have also produced the copies of the Aadhaar Card, which are made part of the record. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶14

4.Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the case pending. Even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature. In the light of the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2017 9 SCC 641(Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath), this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashes the proceedings in C.C.Nos.7 and 220 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruchendur.

¶15

5.These Criminal Original Petitions stand allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in C.C.Nos.7 and 220 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruchendur, are quashed and the terms of Joint Memo of Compromise shall form part and parcel of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶16

Sd/-

¶17

Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶18

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-II)

¶19

Encl: Xerox copy of Joint Compromise Memo

¶20

¶21

The Judicial Magistrate , Thiruchendur.

¶22

The Inspector of Police,

¶23

All Women Police Station, Thiruchendur.

¶24

The Additional Public Prosecutor,

¶25

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶26

+3cc to Ms.P.Jessi Jeeva Priya, Advocate Sr.No.91944 +1cc to Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam, Advocate Sr.No.91896

¶27

MYR

¶28

VB/SV/SAR2/16.11.2018/2P/8C

¶29

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

¶30

Crl.O.P.[MD].Nos.12551 and 15614 of 2017 and 18802 of 2018 25.10.2018

R.Pavithra, v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Pavithra, 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

K.Raja, M/a 75 Years, Vs S.Sunthara Vadivu, F/a 34 Yrs

M. Indrani, W/O.Mahalingam, Vs the Superintendent of Police

K.S.Xavier, Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Jahir Hussian Vs the Inspector of Police

Anbumani Vs the Inspector of Police

Shanmugavel Thevar Vs the Inspector of Police