Allowed

M.Rangaraj v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Aug 2023CRL OP/2015/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Special C.C.No.58 of 2021 after confirming an amicable settlement between the husband and wife parties, with consent from the victim and her mother, citing Supreme Court guidelines despite non-compoundable offences.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the proceedings in Special C.C.No.58 of 2021 pending before the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Coimbatore. Terms of the compromise affidavit form part of the order.

M.Rangaraj Vs the Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.2015 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 08.08.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Crl.O.P No.2015 of 2023 and

¶7

Crl.M.P.No.1136 of 2023

M.Rangaraj

...Petitioners

vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Crime No.6 of 2020 Thudiyalur, Coimbatore.

2.Chitra

...Respondents

PRAYER:

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to criminal case in Spl.C.C.No.58 of 2021 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Coimbatore, and quash the same by allowing this criminal original petition.

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr.N.Manokaran

¶17

For Respondent : Mr.A.Damodaran Additional Public Prosecutor, for R1

¶18

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

¶19

Page No.1/5

¶20

Crl.O.P.No.2015 of 2023

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in Special C.C.No.58 of 2021, pending on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Coimbatore and quash the same.

¶23

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

¶24

The consent affidavit of second respondent has been filed before this Court which have been signed by the second respondent and also by her counsel. The petitioner and the second respondent were also present before this Court. In the consent affidavit, it has been stated that the petitioner and the second respondent had entered into a compromise and amicably settled their issues in Special C.C.No.58 of 2021. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.2/5

¶26

Crl.O.P.No.2015 of 2023

¶27

The victim girl, Chithra, was present before this Court. She stated that

¶28

she was born in the year 2004. She further stated that she married the petitioner

¶29

and a child, born through the marriage, was named as Sridharan and aged about one year. The child was also present before this Court along with the victim girl. The mother of the victim girl, Jothi, was also present before this Court and she stated that her daughter is married to the petitioner and that they are living happily. She further stated that she is not interested in prosecuting this case.

¶30

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 Special C.C.No.58 of 2021, pending on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Coimbatore.

¶31

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

¶32

Page No.3/5

¶33

Crl.O.P.No.2015 of 2023

¶34

In the result, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a

¶35

sequel, the proceedings in Special C.C.No.58 of 2021, pending on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Coimbatore, is quashed and the terms of affidavit shall form part and parcel of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. No cost.

¶36

08.08.2023

¶37

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order nsa

¶38

¶39

1.The Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Coimbatore.

¶40

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Crime No.6 of 2020 Thudiyalur, Coimbatore.

¶41

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶42

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

¶43

Page No.4/5

¶44

Crl.O.P.No.2015 of 2023

¶45

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶46

nsa

¶47

Crl.O.P No.2015 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.No.1136 of 2023

¶48

08.08.2023

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.5/5

M.Rangaraj v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Rangaraj 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

Ganesan Vs Robert Inkarsal

Shanmugam Vs Inspector of Police

Vellingiri Vs Inspector of Police

V.Padmavathi Vs M.Anandhan

G.v.Thomas Vs M/S.Castrol India Ltd.

Mamta Vs the Inspector of Police