Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- P DHANABAL
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 528
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 294(b), 323, 506(1)
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. This Court has perused the terms of the compromise memo._____________Page No. 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD) NO.2330 of 20255. Considering the nature of the offences and they have also entered into a compromise, it is appropriate to allow this petition.6. Recording the said compromise…
Judgment
CRL.OP(MD) NO.2330 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 01.04.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABALCRL. O.P(MD) No.2330 of 20251.Mayandi2.Sarathbabu... PetitionersVs.
The State of Tamil Nadu, Inspector of Police, Moolakaraipatty Police Station, Tirunelveli District. Crime No.168 of 20172.Chelladurai... RespondentsPRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to call for the records in connection with the impugned FIR in Crime No.168 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same. For petitioners: Mr.M.Raja Ravi VarmaFor R1: Mr.M.Vaikkam KarunanithiGovernment Advocate (Crl. Side)_____________Page No. 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD) NO.2330 of 2025 For R2: Mr.Naveen Kumar*****
O R D E R This petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No.168 of 2017 dated 07.12.2017 on the file of the first respondent police, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(1) of IPC and quash the same.
When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel on both sides represented that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and to that effect, they have entered into a compromise and the same was filed before this Court.
The defacto-complainant and all the accused are present and this Court enquired about the terms of compromise. The defacto-complainant represented that they entered into a compromise and he has no objection to quash the FIR. A compromise memo, dated 27.01.2025 signed by the parties and their respective counsel, is also filed before this Court.
This Court has perused the terms of the compromise memo._____________Page No. 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD) NO.2330 of 20255. Considering the nature of the offences and they have also entered into a compromise, it is appropriate to allow this petition.6. Recording the said compromise memo, this petition is allowed and the First Information Report in Crime No.168 of 2017 dated 07.12.2017 on the file of the first respondent police is quashed. 01.04.2025NCC: Yes/NoIndex :Yes / NoInternet: Yes / NoapdTo1.Inspector of Police, Moolakaraipatty Police Station, Tirunelveli District. 2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai._____________Page No. 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP(MD) NO.2330 of 2025P.DHANABAL,JapdCrl.OP(MD) No.2330 of 202501.04.2025_____________Page No. 4 of 4
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.