Madras High Court
Amanullah vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 12 December, 2024
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21838 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 12.12.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21838 of 2024
Amanullah
... Petitioner
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep by the Inspector of Police,
Nanguneri Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
Crime No.210/2014..
2. Muhammed Shahul Hameed @ Shahul Hameed
@ Siddhiq
... Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call
for the records relating to the FIR in Crime No.210/2014 on the file of the 1 st
respondent and quash the same as against the petitioner /Sole Accused.
For petitioner : Mr.K.Khari Kharadas
For R1 : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
For R2 : Mr.P.Praveen Kumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/5
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21838 of 2024
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section 528 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the FIR in Crime No.210/2014
on the file of the 1st respondent as against the petitioner /Sole Accused.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased is the brother of the
petitioner and the defacto complainant. The deceased was travelling along with the
defacto complainant and the petitioner in a Car from Tirunelveli to Nagercoil. The
said Car, which was driven by the petitioner lost its control and collided with the
wall of the Periyakulam Canal Bridge and front portion of the Car was damaged
and the deceased inside the Car sustained injuries, subsequently, he died. Hence,
the complaint was given by the 2nd respondent.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
the second respondent lodged a complaint before the first respondent and an FIR
has been registered in Crime No.210 of (**) 2014 under Sections 237, 339, 338 and
304(A) IPC.
4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that in this case,
after investigation, a final report has been filed and the same was taken cognizance
in C.C.No. 505 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri, for the
offences under Sections 237, 339, 338 and 304(A) IPC, against the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/5
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21838 of 2024
5. The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided to
bury their hatchet and compromised the dispute amicably among themselves, since
the petitioner and the defacto complainant and also the deceased are brothers.
Now, the second respondent is agreeing to withdraw the complaint and is not
willing to pursue the case.
6. A Joint Memo of Compromise dated 11.12.2024 is filed before this
Court signed by the petitioner and the 2nd respondent and their respective counsels.
The petitioner and the 2nd respondent are present before this Court, identified by
Ms.T.Pitchammal, WSSI, All Women Police Station, Nanguneri as well as by the
learned counsels appearing for the parties. This Court enquired both the parties and
satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves
on their own voluntarily without any compulsion.
7. In the instant case, the accident happened due to loss of control, which
does not attribute offence of negligence act as against the petitioner and now the
parties had compromised. When the parties have compromised the matter, the High
Court has the power to quash the complaint for the offence under Sections 237, 339,
8. The legal position expressed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/5
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21838 of 2024
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat) reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641
was taken into consideration.
9. 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. 505 of 2024 as against the petitioner pending before the Judicial Magistrate,
Nanguneri, even though the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.
10. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the
proceedings in C.C.No. 505 of 2024, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri,
is quashed as against the petitioner and the joint compromise memo, shall form part
and parcel of this order.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
(*)Amended as per the order of this court dated
30.01.2025 made in Crl op (MD) No.21838 of
2024.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
// True Copy //
/07/2023
Sub Assistant Registrar(CO)
PNM
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4/5
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21838 of 2024
To
To be substituted to the order which is already despatched on 22.01.2025
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Nanguneri Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
Crime No.210/2014.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
+5 CC to M/s.K.KHARIKHARADAS, Advocate ( SR-6499[F] dated 30/01/2025 )
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.21838 of 2024
12.12.2024
MGJ(08.01.2025) 5P 4C
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from
17.07.2023
KR/31.01.2025 5P/9C
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5/5