Allowed

K. Sasiraman v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 Mar 2022CRL OP(MD)/3698/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Original Petition to quash FIR No. 33 of 2021 allowed on account of post-filing compromise between parties. Court quashed proceedings citing guidelines from Parbathbhai Aahir despite non-compoundable nature of offence.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 33 of 2021 quashed; proceedings quashed insofar as petitioners alone; cost of Rs. 5,000 each to District Siddha Medical Officer.

K. Sasiraman Vs The Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.3698 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 18.03.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD). No.3698 of 2022

¶6

1.K.Sasiraman

¶7

2.Kathirvel

¶8

3.K.Meganathan ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 3

¶9

¶10

1.State by: The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Kulithalai, Karur-639 104. ... 1st Respondent / Complainant 2.Anupriya ... 2nd Respondents / Defacto complainant

¶11

PRAYER :- This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.to call for the records in F.I.R. No. 33 of 2021 now pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Kulithalai, Karur District and quash the same against these petitioners.

¶12

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Sumathi

¶13

For R2 : Mr.Vinesh Kumar

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No. 33 of 2021 on the file of the 1^st Respondent.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

1/3

¶20

CRL OP(MD). No.3698 of 2022

¶21

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 First Information Report in Crime No.33 of 2021 pending on the file of the first respondent police.

¶22

5.This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the proceedings in Crime No.33 of 2021, on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed insofar as the petitioners 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) each as costs, to the District Siddha Medical Officer, CCRI, Periyakulam in State Bank of India, Periyakulam Branch bearing Account No.10767823177, IFSC No.SBIN000898, MICR Code No.625002601, on or before 25.03.2022 and the receipt of payment shall be produced before the first respondent police, failing which the order shall stand dismissed automatically without any further reference to this Court.

¶23

Assistant Registrar(AD-I)

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

21/03/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

PNM

¶27

ENCL.: XEROX COPY OF JOINT COMPROMISE MEMO.

¶28

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.

¶29

¶30

1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Kulithalai, Karur-639 104.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

2/3

¶34

CRL OP(MD). No.3698 of 2022

¶35

COPY TO

¶36

The District Siddha Medical Officer, CCRI, Periyakulam.

¶37

+1 CC to M/s.SUMATHI, Advocate ( SR-13276[F] dated 21/03/2022 )

¶38

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD). No.3698 of 2022 Date : 18/03/2022

¶39

SR(CO) TR(21.03.2022) 3P 5C

¶40

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

¶41

3/3

K. Sasiraman v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Sasiraman 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

Marimuthu Mani Vs The Sub-Inspector of Police

A.Periyya Vs The Inspector of Police

Shanawaz Vs The Inspector of Police

Chandrakala Vs The Superintendent of Police

I.Kader Batcha Vs The Inspector of Police

R.Muthuselvam Vs The Inspector of Police