Allowed

Jaya Mohan v. State Rep.by

Madras HC29 Mar 2021CRL OP/34922/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the Criminal Original Petition quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Held that since parties amicably settled the dispute despite the offence being non-compoundable, the Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to quash the case in P.R.C.No.87 of 2019.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in P.R.C.No.87 of 2019 in Crime No.191 of 2018 are quashed. Petitioners directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- to the Tamil Nadu Advocates Clerk Association.

Jaya Mohan Vs State Rep.by — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 29.03.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

Crl.O.P No.34922 of 2019

¶6

1.Jaya Mohan, S/o.Anbalagan

¶7

2.Jayavel, S/o.Anbalagan 3.Jayakumar, S/o.Anbalagan

¶8

4.Ajithkumar, S/o.Anbalagan

¶9

5.Rajesh, S/o.Chandran

¶10

..Petitioners

¶11

vs.

¶12

State Represented by The Inspector of Police, D1 Triplicane Police Station, Chennai

¶13

(Crime No.191 / 2018)

¶14

Sabari, S/o.Arumugam ..Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in P.R.C.No.87/2019 on the file of XIII M.M.Egmore, Chennai and quash the same.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Thenrajan For Respondents : Mr.C.Raghavan Government Advocate for R1

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No. No.87 of 2019, pending on the file of XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

¶19

The case is still at the stage of trial in P.R.C.No.87 of 2019 pending on the file of the XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. The parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

¶20

The Compromise Memo 08.02.2021 has been filed the 2^nd respondent/de-facto complainant before this Court. The petitioners and the second respondent were also present through

¶21

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

¶22

Video conferencing and they were identified by Mr.E.Arulmani, Sub Inspector of Police (Law and Order), D1, Triplicane Police Station, Chennai, who was also present at the time of hearing through Video conferencing. 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 affidavit it has been stated that the petitioner and the second respondent have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their issues in P.R.C.No.87 of 2019 pending on the file of the XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai in Crime No.191 of 2018. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶23

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 proceedings in P.R.C.No.87 of 2019 pending on the file of the XIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai in Crime No.191 of 2018 pending on the file of the 1^st respondent.

¶24

This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in P.R.C.No.87 of 2019 pending on the file of the XIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai in FIR in Crime No.191 of 2018 pending on the file of the 1^st respondent Police, is quashed and the terms of affidavit shall form part and parcel of this order. The petitioners shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as costs, to the credit of the President, Tamil Nadu Advocates Clerk Association, Madras High Court, Chennai (Indian Bank, High Court Branch, A/c No.484026006, IFSC Code:IDIB000M157), within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and file a photocopy of the receipt along with a memo reporting compliance in the Registry.

¶25

*(Herein enclosed the Xerox Copy of Compromise Affidavit, dated.08.02.2021)

¶26

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

kal

¶29

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

¶30

To 1. The XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai 2. The Inspector of Police, D1 Triplicane Police Station, Chennai 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 4. The President, Tamilnadu Advocates Clerk Association, Madras High Court, Chennai +3CCs to Mr.K.Thenrajan, Advocate, Sr.No.21225 Crl.O.P No.34922 of 2019 SMI (CO) K.RK. (27.09.2021)

¶31

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

Jaya Mohan v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaya Mohan 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

V.Seema Vs State by

Rani Vs The Director of Prosecution (i/c)

R.H.Annadurai Vs State Rep.by

Lalitha Vs The Superintendent of police

B.Kavitha Vs The Superintendent of Police

Vadivel Vs Jaganatharao