Allowed

Feroz v. State Rep by

Madras HC27 Jul 2023CRL OP/16778/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Original Petition, the High Court of Madras applied its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings (C.C.No.277/2015). The court found that the parties had reached an amicable settlement via a compromise affidavit. Relying on Supreme Court guidelines, the court held that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition was allowed; proceedings in C.C.No.277 of 2015 pending before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Tambaram, were quashed.

Feroz Vs State Rep by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.16778 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 27.07.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.16778 of 2023

¶7

Feroz, S/o.Abdul Wahab

¶8

Arifa Wahab, W/o.Abdul Wahab

¶9

Abdul Wahab, S/o. Waheed

¶10

Afroz Banu, W/o.S.Syed Rafick

¶11

S.Syed Rafick, S/o.Syed Mubarak Jan,

¶12

Farook, S/o.T.S.M.Abubacker

¶13

Nazria Shaikh, W/o.Feroz

¶14

... Petitioners

¶15

vs.

¶16

State rep. by Inspector of Police, W-35, All Women Police Station, Tambaram, Chennai – 45. (Cr.No.85 of 2014)

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

1/5

¶19

Crl.O.P.No.16778 of 2023

¶20

Asma W/o.Feroz

¶21

... Respondents

¶22

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records and quash the charges in C.C.No.277 of 2015 against the petitioners/accused pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate's Court – I at Tambaram.

¶23

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Elango For Respondents : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate [Crl.Side] [R1] Ms.C.Shyamala [R2]

¶24

¶25

ORDER

¶26

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.277/2015 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court – I, Tambaram.

¶27

The case is still at the stage of trial. By passage of time, the parties

¶28

have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

2/5

¶31

Crl.O.P.No.16778 of 2023

¶32

A compromise affidavit has been filed by both the parties before this

¶33

Court. The petitioners and the second respondent were also present in person before this Court and they were identified by Ms.B.Rathika, Women Head Constable, All Women Police Station, Selaiyur. In the affidavit it has been stated that the petitioners and the second respondent have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their issues in C.C.No.277 of 2015 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court – I, Tambaram. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶34

Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the case 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 case in C.C.No.277 of 2015 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court – I, Tambaram.

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

3/5

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.16778 of 2023

¶38

This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the

¶39

proceedings in C.C.No.277 of 2015 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court – I, Tambaram is quashed and the terms of affidavit shall form part and parcel of this order.

¶40

27.07.2023

¶41

Index : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral citation : Yes/No mp/mkn

¶42

¶43

1.The Judicial Magistrate Court – I, Tambaram.

¶44

The Inspector of Police, W-35, All Women Police Station, Tambaram, Chennai – 45.

¶45

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Madras.

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

4/5

¶48

Crl.O.P.No.16778 of 2023

¶49

N. ANAND VENKATESH., J

¶50

mp/mkn

¶51

Crl.O.P.No.16778 of 2023

¶52

27.07.2023

¶53

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶54

5/5

Feroz v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Feroz v. State Rep by

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

V.Loganathan Vs P.Edwin

R.E.Balasubramanian Vs the Inspector of Police

V.Chitra Vs M. Arvind Bagrecha

K.K.Sivakumar Vs the State Rep.by

N.Baskar Vs M/S.Hinduja Leyland Finance Limited

Saravanan Vs the Inspector of Police