Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3248 (MAD)

K. Mangalanathan v. State rep. by The Sub-Inspector of Police

2014-09-11

N.KIRUBAKARAN

body2014
Judgment 1. At the instance of the second respondent/de-facto complainant, a case has been registered against the petitioners under Sections 294(b), 355, 323 and 506(i) IPC. After the investigation, a charge sheet has been filed. The said charge sheet is being challenged before this Court. 2. When the matter is called today, both the petitioners as well as the second respondent are present before this Court and the second respondent categorically stated that the issue between him and the petitioners were settled as they are relatives. 3. In view of the categorical statement made by the second respondent, no fruitful result will be achieved by further proceeding in the matter. 4. In view of the above, the charge sheet in C.C. No.147 of 2005 dated 12.04.2005 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi, Ramanathapuram District, is quashed against the petitioners and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.