The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court quashed the proceedings in S.C.No.51 of 2022 regarding offences under IPC Sections 376 and 417, based on a recorded joint compromise memo accepted during a video conference hearing.
Criminal Original Petition allowed and entire proceedings in S.C.No.51 of 2022 quashed in respect of petitioner alone.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6112 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 18.05.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6112 of 2023
Vijay @ Ramaiya ... Petitioner
Vs. 1.State through The Inspector of Police, All women Police Station, Thirmayam, Pudukkottai District. 2.Karthika ... Respondents
Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records of the impugned proceedings in S.C.No.51 of 2022 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Pudhukottai and quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Rajarajan For R1 : Mr.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash
the charge sheet in S.C.No.51 of 2022 pending on the file of Principal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Sessions Judge, Pudhukottai.
1/4
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6112 of 2023
2.The contention of the petitioner is that based on the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.6 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 417, 376, 109 and 506(ii) of IPC, against the petitioner. It appears that there is a small issue between the parties.
3.The further contention of the petitioner is that they compromised the issue with the 2nd respondent amicably. A joint memo of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioner and the 2nd respondent and also by their respective counsels.
4.The petitioner and the 2nd respondent appeared before this Court through video conference along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They were also identified by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and the Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Hence, the Compromise Memo is recorded.
5.Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner and also in view of the joint compromise memo, dated 28.02.2023, this Court is of the opinion that no https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/4
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6112 of 2023
useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending and inclined to quash all further proceedings in S.C.No.51 of 2022 pending on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Pudhukottai, in respect of the petitioner.
6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in S.C.No.51 of 2022 pending on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Pudhukottai, is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioner alone. The compromise memo is recorded and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order.
18.05.2023
Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No tta
To
3/4
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6112 of 2023
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
tta
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6112 of 2023
18.05.2023
4/4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash the proceedings initiated based on a complaint under Sections 376, 417, and 506 IPC.
Whether the matter can be disposed of on record of a joint compromise memo accepted by parties.
Whether useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijay @ Ramaiya
State through The Inspector of Police, All women Police Station, Thirmayam, Pudukkottai District
Karthika
T.V. Thamilselvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
