1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.08.2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.9270 OF 2011 1.P.Duraimurugan 2.M.Poomalai 3.P.Chinnapillai 4.S.Sundarampal 5.R.Sathiya 6.A.Periyasamy 7.P.Selvi 8.Manickathammal @ Dhanalakshmi 9.M.Sekar 10.M.Ramajeyan 11.P.Gomathi ... Petitioners Vs. 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Musiri, Trichy District crime No.22 of 2009 2.D.Akila ... Respondents Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.100 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur and quash the charge sheet and consequential further proceedings as against the petitioners concerned. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi For Respondents: Mr.A.P.Balasubramani G.A., (Crl. Side) for R1 No Appearance for R2 ORDER This petition has been filed to call for the records in C.C.No.100 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur and quash the charge sheet and consequential further proceedings as against the petitioners concerned. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 2.Today, when the matter was taken up, the petitioners 1 to 3/accused Nos.1 to 3 and the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant and the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (criminal side) appearing for R1 are present. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that since it is a matrimonial dispute, the petitioners and the defacto complainant have settled the matter and the 1st petitioner and the defacto complainant wanted to go for divorce by mutual consent. 3.The 2nd respondent/defacto complainant filed an affidavit stating that the marriage solemnized between herself and the 1st petitioner irretrievably broken down due to the misunderstanding arose among them and they wanted to settle the matter and hence, she do not want to pursue the matter against the petitioners/A1 to 11 and she has no objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners. A joint compromise memo has been filed by the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant and the same is recorded. 4.Recording the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant and the joint compromise memo filed by the 1st petitioner/A1 and the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case to quash the proceeding against the petitioners/A1 to A11. 5.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.100 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur, is hereby quashed against the petitioners/A1 to A11 alone. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(W) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar' To 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Musiri, Trichy District 2.The Judicial Magistrate, Thuraiyur. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai +One cc to M/s/D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi, Advocate, SR.No.25945 Arul rl/5c – 16.8.2011 Crl.O.P(MD)No.9270 of 2011 02.08.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/