Allowed

Sahul Hameed @Saravanan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC26 Sept 2024CRL OP(MD)/6798/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought to quash criminal proceedings invoking an amicably settled dispute. The court relied on Supreme Court precedents regarding compromise in non-compoundable offences and ordered the quashing of the charges against the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in C.C.No.129 of 2024 before the Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai are quashed as against the petitioners.

Sahul Hameed @Saravanan Vs The… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 26.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2024 and Crl.M.P(MD)No.5205 of 2024

¶7

1.Sahul Hameed @ Saravanan

¶8

2.Sathik @ Ganjasathik

¶9

3.Nizar Mohamed @ Nizar Ahmed

¶10

4.Mohamed Yasar @ Arafath

¶11

5.Mansoor Alikhan @ Mansoor

¶12

6.Jawan Alikhan @ Jawan

¶13

7.Raj Kaboor

¶14

8.Samunali

¶15

9.Mohamed Jehath @ Jeehath

¶16

10.Mohamed Faish @ Faisal

¶17

11.Shahabudeen @ Sarupudin

¶18

12.Sahul Hameed @ Sahul

¶19

13.Ayoob khan @ Ayub

¶20

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

¶21

1/7

¶22

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2023

¶23

14.Abdul Manaf @ Ameer 15.Sirajudeen 16.Mohamed Thayar 17.Mussarmila @ Sarmila 18.Najibunnisha 19.Niharabanu @ Rihana 20.Sabana 21.Fathimajinna 22.Vahidha 23.Masutha Banu @ Masudha 24.Rasinnabeevi @ Rajina 25.Norrjakan 26.Marjuna : Petitioners/A1 to A26 Vs. 1.State represented by The Inspector of Police, Adiramapattinam Police Station, Thanjavur District. (Crime No.7 of 2013) 2.Haja Nasrudeen 3.Sajidha ... Respondents

¶24

2/7

¶25

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

¶26

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2023

¶27

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in C.C.No.129 of 2024 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai and quash the same.

¶28

For Petitioners : Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed For R1 : Mr.K.Sanja Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶29

For R2 & R3 : Ms.N.Safiya

¶30

ORDER

¶31

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking orders, to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in C.C.No.129 of 2024 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai and quash the same.

¶32

The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant and others in filthy language and also damaged two cars. Hence the complaint.

¶33

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit

¶34

that the second respondent has lodged a complaint before the first

¶35

3/7

¶36

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

¶37

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2023

¶38

respondent and on that basis, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.7 of 2013 and after investigation and filing of the final report, the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No.129 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Pattukotai for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 324, 506(i) IPC and Section 3(1) of TNPPDL Act r/w Section 149 of IPC against the petitioners.

¶39

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

¶40

A Joint Memo of Compromise, dated 30.04.2024 has been filed before this Court which have been signed by the petitioners and the private respondents and also by their respective counsels. The petitioners and the private respondents are present before this Court and and they were identified by Mr.R.Jeyapal, SSI, Adhiramapattinam Police Station, Thanjavur District as well as by the learned counsels appearing for the parties. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

¶41

4/7

¶42

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

¶43

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2023

¶44

In the instant case, the dispute is of personal in nature and the

¶45

parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the matter, the High Court has to power to quash the complaint for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 324, 506(i) IPC and Section 3(1) of TNPPDL Act r/w Section 149 of IPC.

¶46

The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Panjab and another reported in (2012)10 SCC 303 and Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath) reported in (2017)9 SCC 641 were taken into consideration.

¶47

In the light of the guidelines issued in the above said Judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the proceedings in C.C.No.129 of 2024 as against the petitioners pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.

¶48

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.129 of 2024, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai, is quashed as against the petitioners and the joint

¶49

5/7

¶50

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

¶51

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2023

¶52

compromise memo, dated 30.04.2024 shall form part and parcel of this

¶53

order. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶54

26.09.2024

¶55

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No das

¶56

¶57

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai.

¶58

2.The Inspector of Police, Adiramapattinam Police Station, Thanjavur District.

¶59

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶60

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

¶61

6/7

¶62

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2023

¶63

K.MURALI SHANKAR,J.

¶64

das

¶65

Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.6798 of 2024 and Crl.M.P(MD)No.5205 of 2024

¶66

Dated: 26.09.2024

¶67

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

¶68

7/7

Sahul Hameed @Saravanan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahul Hameed @Saravanan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Subramanian Vs The Superintendent of Police

C.Mohan Vs The Superintendent of Police

Theyvendran Vs The Superintendent of Police

Subbaiah @ Arivu Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Thangamani Vs The District Superintendent of Police

K.Murugan Vs M.Senthil Kumar