Allowed

P.Anantha Kannan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 May 2022CRL OP(MD)/8740/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashed an FIR for offences under IPC Sections 294(b), 323, 427 and 506(i) arising from a traffic altercation. The Court allowed the Criminal Original Petition as the parties had settled the dispute and filed a joint compromise memo.

What did the court decide?

The First Information Report in Crime No.206 of 2022 dated 05.04.2022 on the file of the 1st respondent police is quashed.

P.Anantha Kannan Vs The Inspector of Police — Motor Accident Claims | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

CRL.O.P.[MD].No.8740 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 18.05.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRL.O.P.[MD].No.8740 of 2022

¶6

1.P.Anantha Kannan 2.P.Marimuthu ... Petitioners / Accused Nos.1 & 2 Vs.

¶7

1.The State of Tamil Nadu

¶8

Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal Police Station, Madurai District. Crime No.206/2022. ... 1^st Respondent / Complainant 2.Gunasekaran ... 2^nd Respondent / Defacto Complainant

¶9

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to call for the First Information Report in Crime No.206 of 2022 dated 05.04.2022 on the file of the 1^st respondent and quash the same as illegal and devoid of merits in respect of the petitioners are concerned.

¶10

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Ramakrishnan For R1 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Government Pleader. For R2 : Mr.A.Meharaj Pandian.

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.206 of 2022 dated 05.04.2022 on the file of the 1^st respondent police.

¶13

It is the case of the defacto complainant that on 04.04.2022 while he was proceeding in his car bearing Registration No.TN-59CL3240 at Valayalkara Street, there was traffic jam due to a corporation vehicle and at that the time, the first petitioner came in a opposite direction in his two wheeler and dashed the car of the defacto complainant and caused damage to the rear side mirror of his car. When the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

1/2

¶15

CRL.O.P.[MD].No.8740 of 2022

¶16

accused person assaulted the defacto complainant with helmet and scolded by using filthy languages and threatened to cause death of the defacto complainant. Hence, the defacto complainant has given a complaint against these petitioners and the same was registered in Crime No.206 of 2022 for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 427 & 506(i) IPC. Hence, the petitioners have come forward with this petition to quash the same.

¶17

When the matter came up for hearing, the petitioners and the second respondent are present. The second respondent, who is the defacto complainant is agreed to withdraw the complaint lodged against the petitioners and they have filed a compromise memo to that effect. The said Joint memo of compromise filed by the petitioners and the second respondent is recorded and taken on file.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that both parties have settled the issues amongst themselves, this Court is inclined to quash the FIR against the petitioners.

¶19

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the FIR in Crime No.206 of 2022 dated 05.04.2022 on the file of the 1^st respondent police is quashed. The Compromise memo filed by the petitioners and the second respondent shall form part of this order.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Vacation Officer/ Assistant Registrar

¶22

VSM

¶23

Enclose copy of Joint Compromise memo. To

¶24

1.The Inspector of Police, Thilagar Thidal Police Station, Madurai District.

¶25

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,

¶26

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶27

+1 CC to M/s.S. RAMAKRISHNAN, Advocate ( SR-23754[F] dated 19/05/2022 )

¶28

CRL.O.P.[MD].No.8740 of 2022 18.05.2022

¶29

RK(02/06/2022) 2P 4C

¶30

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

¶31

2/2

P.Anantha Kannan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Anantha Kannan 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

Archana Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Palanisamy Vs The Inspector of Police

Sathya Vs The Inspector of Police

Rengasamy .C Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Arulmigu Sri Angala Eswari Koil, Vs The Superintendent of Police

Sundarraj .S Vs The Superintendent of Police