M.Sreenikethan v. State Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12.02.2026

CORAM:

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

1.The State represented by The Inspector Police, All Women Police Station, (Central), Coimbatore.

Cr.No. 54/2024 2.Megha Saini ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita/Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.C.No. 6016 of 2025, pending on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore and to quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.L.Murali Krishnan For R1 : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.Tanay Hazari 1/6

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to call for the records in C.C.No. 6016 of 2025, pending on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore and to quash the same.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there was friendly relationship between the petitioner and the de facto complainant, which graduated to consensual relationship between them; later, due to misunderstanding, the de facto complainant/ 2nd respondent has given a complaint, based on which, a case in Crime No.54 of 2024, was registered for the offences under Sections 376, 417 and 506(i) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 altered to Sections 417 and 506(i) of Indian Penal Code, 1860. However, the parties have decided to go further in their life and they have agreed to compromise the dispute between them and they have also filed a joint memo of compromise.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.

4. The petitioner has stated that he has settled the dispute with the de 2/6

facto complainant amicably and hence, seeks to quash the impugned proceedings in C.C.No. 6016 of 2025, pending on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore. They have also filed an affidavit and a Joint Memo of Compromise to that effect.

5.The petitioner and the de facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and were identified by their respective counsels and Ms.S.Sheelamani, SSI, All Women Police Station, (Central) Coimbatore City.

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.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 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 offences, has to consider the issue as to whether offences of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties. He would further submit that the respondent police has issued a Look Out 3/6

Circular as against the petitioner.

8.The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving noncompoundable offences 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, to quash non-compoundable offences. One very important test that has been laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine if the crime 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 offences in question are 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.

4/6

10. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash the impugned proceedings in C.C.No. 6016 of 2025, pending on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

11.Accordingly, the impugned proceedings in C.C.No. 6016 of 2025, pending on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore, is quashed as against the petitioner and this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of on condition that the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) as costs to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority (TNSLSA), High Court Campus, Chennai 600 104, within a period of one

(1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The affidavit and the Joint Memo of Compromise filed by the petitioner and the second respondent for compromising the offences shall form part of the records. Further, in view of quashment of the proceedings, the respondent police is directed to withdraw the Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner. 12.02.2026 dsn 5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

dsn To

1. The Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore. 2.

The Inspector Police, All Women Police Station, (Central), Coimbatore.

3.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

12.02.2026 6/6