This High Court quashed an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. following an amicable compromise between the accused and the complainant. The Court relied on Supreme Court guidelines allowing quashing in non-compoundable cases where parties have settled disputes.
The FIR in Crime No.8 of 2019 is quashed. The petitioner is ordered to pay Rs.2500/- as costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Crl.O.P.No.29791 of 2019 and Crl.MP.No.16096 of 2019
D.S.Ragu @ Durairaj
...Petitioner/Accused Versus ...1st Respondent/Complainant
1.The State represented by its Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Erode.
Crime No.8 of 2019
...2nd Respondent/Defacto-Complainant
This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to call for the records in connection with crime No.8 of 2019 on the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Erode and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Jeyakumar For Respondent-1 : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor For Respondent-2 : Mr.M.Guru Prasad
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.8 of 2019, pending on the file of the 1st respondent.
respondent were also present before this Court at the time of hearing through video conferencing and they were identified by Mrs.Dhoulath Nisha, Inspector of Police, Erode. In order to identify the respective parties they have also produced the copies of the Aadhaar Card and it is made part of the record. In the joint affidavit it has been stated that the petitioner and the second respondent have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their issues in Crime No.8 of 2019. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.
rli
To
+1cc to Mr.S.Jeyakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.15777 +1cc to Mr.M.Guruprasad, Advocate, S.R.No.15594
Crl.O.P.No.29791 of 2019 and Crl.MP.No.16096 of 2019
AD(CO)
KKV/23/03/2021
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the First Information Report can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. upon a compromise between the parties even though the offence is non-compoundable.
Whether an amicable settlement recorded before this Court justifies quashing of the criminal proceedings.
What directions can be issued regarding costs and compliance when an FIR is quashed on compromise.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of GujarathReferred¶19
2017 9 SCC 641 · Who else cites this
The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar and AnotherReferred¶19
The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar and Another
1 provisions across 1 enactments
D.S.Ragu @ Durairaj
State
Jeevitha
N. Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
