Bose v. State Represented by, Inspector of Police, Aundipatty
2017-08-07
S.S.SUNDAR
body2017
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER : This Criminal Original petition has been filed to call for records in C.C.No.82 of 2017, on the file of the District Munsif cum-Judicial Magistrate, Aundipatty, Theni District and quash the same. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the first respondent. 3. On the basis of the complaint given by the second respondent, a case was registered against the petitioner, who is the sole accused for the offence under Sections 279, 304 (A) of IPC. Subsequently, charge sheet was filed and the case was taken on file in C.C.No.82 of 2017 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Aundipatty, Theni District. After the case was taken on file, it appears that the parties, namely the petitioner, who is the sole accused and the de-facto complainant have entered into an amicable settlement out of Court. The petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.1,20,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Twenty Thousand Only) out of a sum of Rs.2,20,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Thousand Only) payable as agreed by the petitioner as per the compromise. The parties have also produced before this Court, the Joint Compromise Memo signed by them on 18.07.2017. As per the Joint Compromise Memo, dated 18.07.2017, the de-facto complainant agreed not to proceed with the criminal case as agreed earlier. The parties have also expressed that the remaining amount payable as per the Joint Compromise Memo referred to in the petition is also paid. The parties today appeared before this Court expressing that they have signed the joint compromise memo out of their free-will and violation. The identity of parties is verified with reference to the authenticated documents produced by the parties concerned before this Court. The identity of each party is also confirmed by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent. The learned counsels appearing for the respective parties have also signed the Joint Compromise Memo. 4. Having regard to the nature of the case and the terms of the joint compromise memo, dated 18.07.2017, this Court is of the view that no useful or fruitful purpose will be served by keeping this case pending. Hence, on the basis of the Joint Compromise Memo, the above Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.82 of 2017 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Auntipatty, is quashed.
Hence, on the basis of the Joint Compromise Memo, the above Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.82 of 2017 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Auntipatty, is quashed. The Joint Compromise Memo signed by the parties concerned shall form part of the order.