Allowed

Ramachandran v. State Rep by

Madras HC28 Oct 2021CRL OP/20155/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed Criminal Case No. 191 of 2018 filed against Ramachandran for offences including Section 326 IPC, relying on an amicable compromise reached post-charge-sheet between the parties and Supreme Court guidelines in Parbathbhai and Dhruv Gurjar.

What did the court decide?

The charge sheet in C.C. No. 191 of 2018 pending before Judicial Magistrate Court No. I, Kallakurichi, is quashed.

Ramachandran Vs State Rep by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 28.10.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

CRL.O.P.No.20155 of 2021

¶6

Ramachandran ...Petitioner/Accused

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State Rep by its The Sub Inspector of Police, Kallakurichi Police Station, Villupuram District. ...1^st Respondent/

¶9

Investigation Officer

¶10

Selvam ...Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the charge sheet in C.C. No. 191 of 2018 on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Kallakurichi and quash the same.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.Ka. Prabaharan

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.R. Vinothraja No.1 Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the charge sheet in C.C. No. 191 of 2018 on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Kallakurichi and quash the same.

¶16

2.The case of the prosecution is that there was a dispute between the petitioner's grandmother, namely, Meenachi and the 2^nd respondent, who was a tenant under her, with regard to vacating the house. On 21.06.2018, at about 11.30a.m., it is alleged that the petitioner threatened the 2^nd respondent and his relative, by name, Ramesh in filthy language, kicked him and even when to the extent of assaulted him with a crowbar, resulting in Ramesh sustaining grievous injury on his head. Hence, a complaint came to be lodged by the 2^nd respondent with the 1^st respondent, who registered a case in Crime No. 438 of 2018 for offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii)

¶17

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

¶18

IPC and subsequently, the same was altered to Sections 294(b), 352, 326 and 506(ii) IPC. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed before Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kallakurichi and the same was taken on file in C.C. No. 191 of 2018.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that subsequently, the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their issues, which is the subject matter of the case in C.C. No. 191 of 2018. Hence, the petitioner has filed this petition to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.191 of 2018.

¶20

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

¶21

A joint memo of compromise dated 25.10.2021 has been filed by the petitioner and 2^nd respondent stating that the issue between them has been settled amicably and they are ready to give a quietus to the issue without any claim or counterclaim with each other. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶22

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), 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 case in C.C.No.191 of 2018, pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Kallakurichi.

¶23

This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in C.C.No. 191 of 2018 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kallakurichi, is quashed and the terms of memo of compromise shall form part and parcel of this order.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

sms

¶29

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

¶30

¶31

The Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Kallakurichi.

¶32

The Sub Inspector of Police, Kallakurichi Police Station, Villupuram District. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. +1cc to M/s.S.Doraisamy, Advocate, S.R.No.56293

¶33

CRL.O.P.No.20155 of 2021

¶34

RP(CO) RGA(17/11/2021)

¶35

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

Ramachandran v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramachandran v. State Rep by

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

Mother of Mercy Church, Rep by Its Vs the Tashildar

M.Nagarajan Vs the State Rep.by

D.Anand Vs State Rep.by Its

Raja Vs State Rep.by Its

Siva Vs State Rep by

R.Balaji Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Police