Micheal Raj v. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, AWPS Police Station, Madurai
2014-08-22
N.KIRUBAKARAN
body2014
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment 1. The petitioner has challenged the F.I.R filed in Crime No.17 of 2013 based on the complainant given by the second respondent under Sections 417 and 376 IPC. 2. When the matter is called today, both the petitioner as well as the second respondent are present before this Court and they have submitted that they got married in the Registrar Office on 30.07.2014 and the same was registered before the Marriage Officer for Special Marriage, District Registrar Office, Madurai (South) on 30.07.2014. 3. It is submitted by both parties that the marriage was conducted in the presence of the parents of the second respondent and both the petitioner as well as the second respondent are living with the parents of the second respondent. That apart, a child was born on 18.09.2014 because of the relationship between the petitioner and the second respondent. 4. A joint memo was signed by both parties and countersigned by both the Counsels has been filed before this Court confirming the marriage and also the fact that the petitioner is living with the second respondent. 5. In view of that no useful purpose will be achieved for further proceeding in the above matter and the F.I.R is quashed. It is made clear that in case if the petitioner deserts the second respondent, the second respondent is at liberty to move this Court for modification of order. 6. With the above direction, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.