The Madras High Court considers the fact that the parties have chosen to settle their differences amicably, and acknowledges that the offences involved in the case are not compoundable in nature
DATED : 23.08.2023
CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Crl.O.P No.19231 of 2023
Factual Background:
The case of Sarath Kumar and Senthil Kumar vs. State and Sathish Kumar involves a Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking to quash FIR No.186 of 2023, which is pending investigation at the M.K.B. Nagar Police Station in Chennai.
The petitioners, Sarath Kumar and Senthil Kumar, are accused of a certain crime mentioned in FIR No.186 of 2023. The complaint is lodged by the State through the Inspector of Police at the M.K.B. Nagar Police Station. Additionally, Sathish Kumar, the de facto complainant, is the second respondent in the case. The petitioners have approached the court seeking the quashing of the FIR.
Court Proceedings and Observations:
The court notes that the case is currently under investigation and that the parties involved have come forward to amicably resolve their issues through a compromise. A Memorandum of Compromise, dated 16.08.2023, has been signed by the petitioners, the second respondent (Sathish Kumar), and their respective counsel. An affidavit by the second respondent affirming the compromise has also been filed. During the court proceedings, both parties affirmed the compromise.
Considering the compromise and the fact that the parties have chosen to settle their differences amicably, the court acknowledges that the offences involved in the case are not compoundable in nature. However, the court refers to guidelines from the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in Parbathbhai Aahir vs. State of Gujrath (2017) 9 SCC 641, which suggests a nuanced approach to cases involving compromise.
In light of the guidelines and exercising caution, the court proceeds to quash FIR No.186 of 2023, which is pending investigation by the M.K.B. Nagar Police Station. The court emphasizes that its decision is based on the amicable settlement reached between the parties.
Disposition and Costs:
The Criminal Original Petition is allowed, resulting in the quashing of the investigation in FIR No.186 of 2023. The terms of the compromise, including the affidavit, are incorporated into the court’s order. Additionally, the court orders each petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.750/- (Rupees seven hundred and fifty only) as costs. These costs are to be paid to M/s. Vakil Kumasthakkal Sangam, Cuddalore, within two weeks of receiving a copy of the court’s order. The petitioners are required to submit a photocopy of the payment receipt along with a compliance memo to the court registry.
Future Proceedings:
The case is scheduled to be postured for reporting compliance on September 11, 2023.
Conclusion:
The case of Sarath Kumar and Senthil Kumar vs. State and Sathish Kumar highlights the significance of parties reaching an amicable resolution in criminal cases, even when the offences involved are not ordinarily compoundable. The court’s decision to quash the FIR is guided by the principle that parties have the right to compromise and settle their disputes, as long as it is not against public policy or the larger interest of justice. The case underscores the court’s role in ensuring justice while respecting the autonomy of parties to settle their differences outside of the adversarial legal process.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Shreeya S Shekar