Allowed

L.Pazhani v. Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 Jun 2021CRL OP/8912/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the Criminal Original Petition to quash the investigation into Crime No.104/2021. The parties had reached an amicable settlement and filed a Memorandum of Compromise. The Court held that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the FIR pending despite the offence being non-compoundable.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the investigation in Crime No.104/2021 and the First Information Report on the file of the 1st respondent police.

L.Pazhani Vs Inspector of Police — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 18.06.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶5

CRL.O.P.No.8912 of 2021

¶6

1.L.Pazhani 2.Lathish 3.Venkatesh

¶7

... Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

Inspector of Police, Anna Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

¶10

G.Sankaran

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the FIR pertaining to the investigation pending in Crime No.104/2021 on the file of Anna Nagar Police Station, Chennai District herein and quash the same.

¶13

For Petitioners : Ms.S.Karthika For 1^st Respondent : Mr.A.Damodaran, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ORDER

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.104 of 2021, dated 03.04.2021, on the file of the 1 st respondent Police.

¶15

2.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.

¶16

3.The Memorandum of Compromise dated 16.06.2021 has been filed before this Court. The petitioners and the 2^nd respondent were also present through Video conferencing. In the Memorandum of Compromise, it has been stated that the petitioners and the second respondent have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their issues in Crime No.104 of 2021 and the 2^nd respondent agreed to withdraw the case. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶17

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

¶18

4.Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be

¶19

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 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 First Information Report in Crime No.104 of 2021, on the file of the 1^st respondent Police.

¶20