Allowed

P.Manjamuthu v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Nov 2019CRL OP/25471/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order, in a criminal original petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashed the pending proceedings in Crime No.154 of 2018. The petitioners cited a trust deed of settlement and affidavit file by the de facto complainant on 08.11.2019. The court recorded the complaination and granted the prayer.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings in Crime No.154 of 2018 pending on the file of the First Respondent are quashed and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

P.Manjamuthu Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 08.11.2019

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶4

Crl.OP No.25471 of 2019

¶5

1.P.Manjamuthu

¶6

2.S.Sanjay

¶7

3.R.Durairaj @ Kalairaj

4.S.Senthamarai

5.P.Santhappan

6.C.Krishnakumar

7.K.Karuppaiya

8.R.Karuppaiya

9.S.Arun

10.Arul

11.Mohan.P

12.S.Ravi .. Petitioners/ Accused 1 to 12 Vs.

¶17

The Sub Inspector of Police, Mangalamedu Police Station, Perambalur District.

¶18

S.Suriya .. Respondent I/ Respondent II/ Defendant Complainant

¶19

Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to Crime No.154 of 2018 pending on the file of the 1^st respondent and quash the same.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan For Respondents : Mr.C.Iyyapparaj Additional Public Prosecutor for R1

¶21

: Mr.S.Balasubramaniam for R2

¶22

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

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

When the matter came up for hearing today, the petitioners as well as the second respondent/defacto complainant are personally present before this Court and identified themselves. They also produced their identity proofs before this Court.

¶25

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the second respondent and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent.

¶26

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that pending proceedings in Crime No.154 of 2018 pending on the file of the 1^st respondent, the second respondent/de-facto complainant and the petitioners have amicably settled the issue among themselves and the defacto complainant has also filed a compromise affidavit dated 08.11.2019 stating that he has no objection if the proceedings in Crime No.154 of 2018 pending on the file of the 1^st respondent is quashed.

¶27

4.Recording the statements made by the defacto complainant in the affidavit filed by him dated 08.11.2019, the entire proceedings in Crime No.154 of 2018 pending on the file of the 1^st respondent is quashed. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.

¶28

Assistant Registrar(CS VII)

¶29

//True Copy//

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

ssr/sbn To

¶32

The Sub Inspector of Police, Mangalamedu Police Station, Perambalur District.

¶33

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶34

+1cc to Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan, Advocate SR.No. 93002 Crl.OP No.25471 of 2019

¶35

A.SK(13/11/2019)

¶36

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

P.Manjamuthu v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Manjamuthu v. the Sub 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

P.Chinnammal Vs the Commissioner of Police

A.Joshua Jothi Anbaiya Vs the Superintendent of Police

R.Prema W/O. Kalaimohan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its

Mr.Ganamani, Aged 52 Years, Vs State Rep by

Suriya Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

K.Malleswara Rao Vs the Commissioner of Police