Ms.Suba v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police (Crime),

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.01.2026

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Suba ... Petitioner Vs.

1.

The Inspector of Police (Crime), J-2, Adyar Police Station, Adyar - 600 020. (Crime No.71 of 2025) G.Vanitha ... Respondents P RAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita/Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records and to quash all the proceedings in the First Information Report in Crime No.71 of 2025, on the file of the first respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Senthil Kumar For R1 : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.P.Paul Selvam

O R D E R

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.71 of 2025, on the file of the first respondent police, pending against the petitioner, on the basis of the 1/6

compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the de facto complainant/second respondent.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

3.

Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant/R2, the aforesaid case in Crime No.71 of 2025 was registered on the file of the first respondent Police against the petitioner/accused, for the offence under Section 316 of the BNS, which is now sought to be quashed.

4.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as for the second respondent/de facto complainant submitted that on the advice of elders, the parties have now amicably settled the issue among themselves and that a Joint Memo of Compromise to that effect has also been filed. Hence, they seek to quash the First Information Report as against the petitioner.

5.

The petitioner and the de facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsel as well as by Mr.E.Damodaran, SI, J2 Police Station, Adyar. 2/6

6.

On being enquired by this Court, the de facto complainant stated that she has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioner and she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings and therefore, seeks to quash the same.

7.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that though the parties have entered into a compromise while this case is pending, this Court, taking into account the seriousness of the offence, has to consider the issue as to whether an offence of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties. 8.

The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving noncompoundable offence pending against the petitioner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641, has given sufficient guidelines that must be taken into consideration by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 528 BNSS), to quash non-compoundable offence. One very important test that has been laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine if the crime 3/6

in question is purely individual in nature or a crime against the society with overriding public interest. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that offences against the society with overriding public interest even if they get settled between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court. 9.

In the present case, the offence in question is purely individual/personal in nature. It involves dispute between the petitioner and the second respondent and quashing the proceedings will not affect any overriding public interest in this case and no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash all the further proceedings pending against the petitioner pertaining to Crime No.71 of 2025, registered by the first respondent police, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 BNSS.

10. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of and the case in Crime No.71 of 2025, pending on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed as against the petitioner, on condition that the petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) as costs to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority (TNSLSA), High Court Campus, Chennai - 600 104, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4/6

11. The Joint Memo of Compromise filed by the petitioner and the second respondent for compromising the offence shall form part of the records. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 22.01.2026 ham To 1.

The Inspector of Police (Crime), J-2, Adyar Police Station, Adyar - 600 020.

The Member Secretary, The Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority (TNSLSA), High Court Campus, Chennai.

3.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

ham 22.01.2026 1/2 6/6