Allowed

A.Vigneshkumar @ Vikki v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC27 Apr 2022CRL OP(MD)/1352/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. relying on State of Gujarat guidelines. The case was compromised amicably via a joint memo signed by parties and counsel, rendering continued proceedings unnecessary despite non-compoundable nature.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in S.T.C.No.842 of 2021 quashed as far as the petitioner is concerned; petitioner to pay Rs.5,000 as costs.

A.Vigneshkumar @ Vikki Vs The Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.O.P(MD)No.1352 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 27.04.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Crl.O.P(MD)No.1352 of 2022 and

¶7

Crl.M.P(MD)Nos.1006 and 1007 of 2022

¶8

A.Vigneshkumar @ Vikki ... Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

¶11

(Cr.No.490 of 2019) ...1^st Respondents/Complainant

¶12

2.A.Sarathkumar ...2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶13

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in STC.No.842 of 2021 on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi and quash the same as far as the petitioner is concerned.

¶14

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Ramsundarvijayraj For R1 : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.side)

¶15

For R2 : Mr.P.Sarathkumar

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings as against the petitioner in S.T.C.No.842 of 2021 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi.

¶18

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

¶19

3. A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court which have been signed by the petitioner and the second respondent and also by their respective counsel.

¶20

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

¶21

1/3

¶22

Crl.O.P(MD)No.1352 of 2022

¶23

4 .Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the First Information Report pending before the respondent police. 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), this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashes the proceedings in S.T.C.No.842 of 2021 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi.

¶24

5. This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in S.T.C.No.842 of 2021 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi, is quashed insofar as the petitioner alone and the terms of joint compromise memo 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 Government of Tamil Nadu, CMPRF in IOB , Secretariat Branch, Chennai9 (Account No.11720 10000 00070, IFSC Code: IOBA0001172) on or before 05.05.2022 and the receipt of payment shall be produced before the concerned Court, failing which the order shall stand dismissed automatically without any further reference to this Court.

¶25

Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶26

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶27

vsd Encl.: xerox copy of Joint Compromise memo. 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.

¶28

¶29

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Paramakudi.

¶30

2.The Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

2/3

¶34

Crl.O.P(MD)No.1352 of 2022

¶35

Copy to The Officer Incharge, Chief Ministers Public Relief Fund, Finance(CMPRF) Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

¶36

+1 CC to M/s.S. RAMSUNDARVIJAYRAJ, Advocate ( SR-21772[F] dated 27/04/2022 ) Crl.O.P(MD)No.1352 of 2022 and Crl.M.P(MD)Nos.1006 and 1007 of 2022 27.04.2022

¶37

(CO) TR(29.04.2022) 3P 6C

¶38

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

¶39

3/3

A.Vigneshkumar @ Vikki v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Vigneshkumar @ Vikki 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Pandiyaraja Vs Thanuskodi

Ramya Bharathi Vs the Superintendent of Police

N.Rangarajan Vs v.Selvaraj

Sridharan Vs The Superintendent of Police

Sathiya Vs THe Deputy Superintendent of Police

P.Oliver Robersan Vs The Inspector of Police