Allowed

Vajiravel v. State by Its

Madras HC27 Oct 2021CRL OP/19894/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras quashed an FIR registered for violent offenses under Chapter XVII of the IPC, relying on Supreme Court guidelines. The court allowed the petition despite non-compoundable charges because parties had reached an amicable settlement, rendering further investigation useless.

What did the court decide?

The First Information Report in Crime No. 334 of 2021 is quashed and the investigation is stopped.

Vajiravel Vs State by Its — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 27.10.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

CRL.O.P.No.19894 of 2021

¶6

1.Vajiravel 2.Silambarasan 3.Manogaran ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 3

¶7

Versus

¶8

1.State by its Inspector of Police, Sholingur Police Station, Sholingur, Ranipet District. (Crime No.334 of 2021)

¶9

2.Shankar ... Respondents/Complainant /Defacto Complainant

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to call for the records relating to the case in Crime No.334 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the 1^st respondent and quash the same.

¶11

For Petitioners :Mr.K.G.Senthilkumar

¶12

For Respondent :Mr.A.Damodaran, No.1 Additional Public Prosecutor

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the case in Crime No.334 of 2021 pending investigation on the file of the 1^st respondent and quash the same.

¶15

2.The case of the prosecution is that The defacto complainant's Aunt viz., Amsa's 17 chicken were suddenly died. In this regard, the dispute arose between the petitioners and the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant viz., Shankar S/o Subramani lodged a complaint stating that the

¶16

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

¶17

petitioners herein assaulted him, his brother and brother-in-law on 23.09.2021 at about 7.30pm, Vajiravel assaulted his brother with his hands, A2 assaulted the defacto complainant over his head with a knife, A3 assaulted with a stick all over the body and threatened with dire consequences. Hence, the first respondent police has registered a case in Crime No.334 of 2021 for offences under Section 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 307 and 506(ii) IPC on 24.09.2021.

¶18

3.The case is still at the stage of investigation. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

¶19

4.An affidavit dated 19.10.2021 has been filed by the 2^nd respondent. The petitioners and the 2^nd respondent are present through Video conferencing. In the affidavit, it is stated that since the 2^nd respondent and the petitioners now compromised, he is not inclined to proceed with the investigation further. This Court also enquired both the parties and satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶20

5.Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the First Information Report 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), and after exercising due caution as advised by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10), this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashes the First Information Report in Crime No.334 of 2021, on the file of the 1^st respondent Police.

¶21

6.This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the investigation in Crime No.334 of 2021, on the file of the 1 st respondent police, is quashed against the petitioners.

¶22

SD/ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶23

// TRUE COPY //

¶24

SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶25

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

¶26

sms To

¶27

1.The Inspector of Police, Sholingur Police Station, Sholingur, Ranipet District. (Crime No.334 of 2021)

¶28

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. +1cc to Mr.K.G.Senthil Kumar, Advocate Sr.55448

¶29

CRL.O.P.No.19894 of 2021

¶30

nmi[co] srg 01/12/2021

¶31

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

Vajiravel v. State by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vajiravel v. State by Its

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

V.Nedumaran Vs Amrish

Ilangovan Vs the State Rep by

V.Yugathithyan Vs The State rep by its

Joshy Madukkakuzhy Vs G.Elizabeth Meera

Buvaneswari Vs State Rep by

K.v.Ramya Sri Vs the Commissioner of Police