Allowed

Velu v. State Rep by

Madras HC1 Nov 2021CRL OP/19937/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings under S. 482 Cr.P.C. The prosecution alleged assault and abuse, but parties had settled amicably. The Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to quash the complaint and proceedings in light of Supreme Court guidelines on settlement in non-compoundable cases.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.66 of 2021 pending before Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Arakkonam are quashed against the petitioners.

Velu Vs State Rep by — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.11.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

CRL.O.P.No.19937 of 2021

1.Velu

2.Raja

3.Karthi

..Petitioners

Versus

1.State Represented by, Inspector of Police, Arakkonam Taluk Police Station, Vellore District. (Crime No.586/2016).

¶12

2.Jeeva ...Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertains to the C.C.No.66 of 2021, (pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Arakkonam) quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioners :Mr.J.Lokesh

¶15

For R1 :Mr.A.Damodaran, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.66 of 2021, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Arakkonam.

¶18

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 22.12.2016, at about 08.00 p.m., when the 2^nd respondent was going to home after work, the petitioners waylaid the 2^nd respondent and asked that why he has come here and then, all the petitioners abused him with filthy language and attacked with an iron rod. Due to which, the 2^nd respondent sustained injury and admitted in the Government Hosptal, Arakkonam, where he lodged a complaint before the 1^st respondent Police and the same was registered in Crime No.586 of 2016, for offence under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of IPC.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

4.The 2^nd respondent has filed an affidavit that he will not proceed with the case further. The petitioners and the 2^nd respondent are present through Video conferencing. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶22

5.Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings 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 Suprme 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 proceedings in C.C.No.66 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Arakkonam.

¶23

6.This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in C.C.No.66 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Arakkonam, is quashed against the petitioners.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-IX)

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

vv2

¶29

¶30