Allowed

Balamani v. Mohanapriya

Madras HC22 Jun 2023CRL OP/8463/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under IPC sections 294(b), 323, 406, 498A, and 506(i) in a family dispute after parties reached a settlement via a Joint Memo of Compromise. The Court directed one petitioner to return specific property to the respondent.

What did the court decide?

The impugned proceedings in CC No.64 of 2021 were quashed. The petitioner was directed to return a bike and household articles to the respondent by 12.07.2023.

Balamani Vs Mohanapriya — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl OP No.8463 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 22.06.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.8463 of 2021

¶7

and Crl.M.P.Nos.5578 & 5579 of 2021

1. Balamani

2. Balakrishnan

3. Sakunthala

4. Balamurugan

5. Kamalajothi

... Petitioners / Accused

¶14

Versus

¶15

Mohanapriya ... Respondent / Complainant

¶16

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.64 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhachalam and to quash the same.

¶17

For Petitioners : Mr. S. Panneer Selvam For Respondent : Mr. M. Selvam

¶18

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

¶19

1/5

¶20

Crl OP No.8463 of 2021

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash

¶23

the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.64 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Vridhachalam, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 406, 498A and 506(i) of IPC.

¶24

2.Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned

¶25

counsels for the petitioners and the respondent submitted that parties have arrived at a settlement and the respondent has decided to withdraw the allegations in the impugned proceedings and prayed for quashing of the impugned proceedings on the basis of the Joint Memo of Compromise dated 22.06.2023.

¶26

3.Both the parties are present today and have signed the Joint Memo of Compromise along with their learned counsels. The said Joint Memo of Compromise is taken on record. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, there would be no useful purpose in keeping the proceedings pending in C.C.No.64 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Vridhachalam.. Hence, the impugned proceedings is quashed.

¶27

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

¶28

2/5

¶29

Crl OP No.8463 of 2021

¶30

4.At this juncture, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted

¶31

that the 1 st petitioner has to return a bike, which is in the name of the respondent and also the household articles, which was gifted for the marriage of the respondent. However, this aspect has not been incorporated in the Compromise Memo. The learned counsel for the petitioners has agreed to return the bike and the household articles on or before 12.07.2023. If the respondent is aggrieved by non-compliance of the above commitment given by the 1 st petitioner with respect to the return of bike and other household articles, the respondent can approach this Court for appropriate remedy.

¶32

5.With the above observations, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶33

22.06.2023

¶34

smv

¶35

Index: Yes/No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation: Yes / No

¶36

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

¶37

3/5

¶38

Crl OP No.8463 of 2021

¶39

¶40

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhachalam.

¶41

2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

¶42

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

¶43

4/5

¶44

Crl OP No.8463 of 2021

¶45

SUNDER MOHAN, J

¶46

smv

¶47

Crl.O.P.No.8463 of 2021

¶48

22.06.2023

¶49

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

¶50

5/5

Balamani v. Mohanapriya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balamani v. Mohanapriya

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

Dinesh Kumar Vs the State Rep.by

G.Thangavel Vs M.Senthilkumar

Karthik Vs the State Rep by

S.Natarajan Vs State Rep by

C.Shanmugam Vs State Rep.by

Vanjinathan Vs Nandhkumar