Quashed

Vengai v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC23 Nov 2021CRL OP(MD)/2753/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a CRP under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash prosecution forIPC offences involving assault and attempted murder. The Court quashed proceedings as parties had executed a joint compromise and the defacto complainant, victim, and juvenile aspect did not justify continuing prosecution.

What did the court decide?

The impugned proceedings were quashed as a whole, and the benefit of the order was held to inure in favour of the juvenile accused.

Vengai Vs The Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Crl.O.P(MD)No.2753 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.11.2021 CORAM :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶4

Crl.O.P(MD)No.2753 of 2021

¶5

1.Vengai 2.Muthuchamy 3.Paulpandi

¶6

4.Sellammal

¶7

5.Muthumari

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.State represented by its The Inspector of Police, Silaiman Police Station, Madurai District. (Crime No.239 of 2013) ... Respondent No.1 / Complainant

¶10

2.Irulandi ... 2^nd Respondent / Defacto Complainant

¶11

Prayer : This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records of pending case in S.C.No.307 of 2020 on the file of the learned Principal Sub Court, Madurai in Crime No.239 of 2013 dated 18.09.2013 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, and 307 of IPC registered by the 1^st respondent police and to quash the same.

¶12

For Petitioners : Mr.J.Vijayraja For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1. Mr.B.Veerapandi for R2.

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This criminal original petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings in S.C.No.307 of 2020 on the file of the learned Principal Sub Court, Madurai, for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 307 of IPC.

¶15

2.The petitioners give a solemn undertaking before me that they will not interfere with the family of the second respondent. The defacto complainant/Irulandi and the victim/Muthulakshmi are present before this Court in person. They have been duly identified by Mr.R.Rajasekarn, Sub Inspector of Police attached to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ first respondent police. The parties have also filed a memo of

¶16

1/2

¶17

Crl.O.P(MD)No.2753 of 2021

¶18

joint compromise dated 11.01.2021. The victim as well as the defacto complainant have no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings. When the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and the defacto complainant does not want to pursue the complaint, no purpose will be served in keeping the prosecution alive. It is stated that one of the persons named in the FIR was a juvenile at the time of occurrence. However, the Juvenile Justice Board is yet to take cognizance on the same. Since the defacto complainant wants this Court to give quietus to this issue, the proceedings stand quashed as a whole and the benefit of the said order will inure in favour the juvenile also.

¶19

Assistant Registrar (AD II)

¶20

// True Copy //

¶21

ias

¶22

Note :In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶23

To:

¶24

(Encl : Joint Compromise Memo)

¶25

1.The Principal Sub Judge, Madurai.

¶26

2.The Inspector of Police, Silaiman Police Station, Madurai District.

¶27

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶28

+4 CC to M/s.J. VIJAYARAJA, Advocate (SR-35585[F] dated 24/11/2021)

¶29

Crl.O.P(MD)No.2753 of 2021 23.11.2021

¶30

TSK(CO)

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SB(30.11.2021) 2P 8C

¶32

2/2

Vengai v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vengai v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muniyandi Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Selvaraj Vs The Inspector of Police

Selva Vinayagam Vs The Inspector of Police

Ajith@Ajithkumar Vs The Inspector of Police

Balamurugan Vs The Inspector of Police

Noorullah Vs The Inspector of Police