Allowed

Lingadurai v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC14 Oct 2020CRL OP(MD)/8622/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court quashed First Information Reports in Crime Nos.337 and 336 of 2020 under Section 482 CrPC. The court held that since the parties had buried the hatchet, no purpose would be served in keeping the prosecution alive.

What did the court decide?

The impugned First Information Reports in Crime No.337 of 2020 and Crime No.336 of 2020 are quashed.

Lingadurai Vs The Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8622 of 2020 and batch

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 14.10.2020

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl.O.P(MD)Nos.8622, 9211 and 10380 of 2020

¶6

Crl.O.P(MD)Nos.8622 of 2020:-

¶7

1.Lingadurai

¶8

2.Anand

¶9

3.Ganesaraja

¶10

4.Balamurugan

¶11

5.Marikani

¶12

6.Chinnamani

¶13

7.Aravinth ... Petitioners

¶14

Vs.

¶15

State represented by The Inspector of Police, Sendhamaram Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.337 of 2020)

¶16

2.Kasivishwanthan ... Respondents

¶17

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No.337 of 2020 on the file of the 1^st respondent police and quash the same by allowing the criminal original petition.

¶18

For Petitioners : Mr.D.Nallathambi For Respondents : Mr.M.V.Chandrasekar,

¶19

Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1 Mr.G.Mohankumar for R2

¶20

Crl.O.P(MD)Nos.9211 of 2020:-

¶21

1.Kasivishwanthan

¶22

2.Ramkumar ... Petitioners

¶23

Vs.

¶24

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

¶25

1/3

¶26

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8622 of 2020 and batch

¶27

State represented by The Inspector of Police, Sendhamaram Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.336 of 2020)

¶28

2.Chinnamani ... Respondents

¶29

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No.336 of 2020 on the file of the 1^st respondent police and quash the same with respect to Accused 1 to 3 by allowing the criminal original petition.

¶30

For Petitioners : Mr.G.Mohankumar For Respondents : Mr.M.V.Chandrasekar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1 Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram for R2

¶31

Crl.O.P(MD)Nos.10380 of 2020:-

¶32

Suyambulingam ... Petitioner Vs.

¶33

1.State represented by The Inspector of Police, Sendhamaram Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.336 of 2020)

¶34

2.Chinnamani ... Respondents

¶35

¶36

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Mohankumar For Respondents : Mr.M.V.Chandrasekar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1 Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram for R2

¶37

COMMON ORDER

¶38

These criminal original petitions have been filed for quashing impugned First Information Reports in Crime Nos.366 and 367 of 2017 registered on the file of Sendhamaram Police Station.

¶39

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

¶40

2/3

¶41

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8622 of 2020 and batch

¶42

2.The defacto complainants are Kasivishwanthan and Chinnamani. Kasivishwanthan as well as Chinnamani appeared before this Court through video conferencing. They have been duly identified also. The defacto complainants have no objection for quashing the impugned First Information Reports. When the parties have buried the hatchet, no purpose will be served in keeping the prosecution alive. The impugned First Information Reports are quashed. These criminal original petitions are allowed.

¶43

Assistant Registrar (T&P)

¶44

// True Copy //

¶45

ias

¶46

NOTE: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶47

To:-

¶48

The Inspector of Police, Sendhamaram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶49

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

¶50

+1 CC to Mr.D.NALLATHAMBI, Advocate SR.no.20200. +2 CC to Mr.G.Mohankumar, Advocate, SR.Nos.20198 & 20199.

¶51

Crl.O.P(MD)Nos.8622, 9211 and 10380 of 2020 14.10.2020

¶52

KG(CO) CS(02.11.2020) 3P 6C

¶53

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

¶54

3/3

Lingadurai v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lingadurai 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

Jahir Hussain Vs The Inspector of Police

S.Prabhakaran Vs The Superintendent of police

Uthayasuriyan Vs The Inspector of Police

Mrs.Meenakshi Vs Premkumar

The Superintendent of Police Vs Liyakath Alikhan

Sabapathi Vs The Superintendent of police