J. Kiran v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.06.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR & Crl.M.P. No. 6187 of 2026 J. Kiran ..Petitioner Vs.
State rep. by The Inspector of Police, T4, Maduravoyal Police Station, Chennai.
(Cr.No. 413 of 2025) ..Respondent Prayer:
Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records relating to the Cr. No. 413 of 2025 on the file of respondent Police and quash the same.
For Petitioner ::
Mr.M. Sathishwaran For Respondent ::
Mr.R. Rajasekaran Counsel for Govt. of Tamil Nadu (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
The petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No. 413 of 2025 registered for the offence under Section 194(2) of BNS on the file of the respondent Police has filed this quash application.
1\4
2.
The case against the petitioner is that on 06.06.2025, at about 12 noon, one Sinthiyal Peter approached the respondent Police and lodged a complaint stating that there was maintenance work carried on in her apartment, which was overseen by one Karpagam. The said Karpagam had not properly maintained the records and when the same was questioned, one Jayachandran (petitioner' s father), the petitioner, Karpagam and her son Narayanan had abused her using derogatory words and there was heated exchange of words. On the said complaint, CSR No. 807/2025 was assigned, both parties were called for an enquiry and sent off. However, on the same day, at about 7.45p.m., when Police personnel from respondent Police Station were on a patrol duty in Ayyavu Naicker Street, they found that the petitioner, his father Jayachandran, Karpagam and her son Narayanan on one side and Sinthiyal Peter and another on the other side were fighting with each other causing disturbance to the public. Hence, the complaint came to be registered.
3.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there was some dispute between one Karpagam, who was carrying on maintenance work in the apartment where the petitioner is residing and 2\4
Sinthiyal Peter, petitioner's neighbour regarding maintenance of accounts and with the intention to replace the said Karpagam, the said Sinthiyal Peter started a wordy quarrel with the petitioner's father and subsequently, lodged a complaint with the Police. It was a dispute between the said Karpagam and Sinthiyal Peter and since the petitioner was present at the time of the incident, he has been falsely implicated. The learned counsel further submitted that the pendency of the FIR would affect the career of the petitioner, who is in the final semester of his LLB degree. In support of the same, the petitioner has also filed an affidavit dated 22.06.2026. 4.
Learned Government Counsel (Crl.Side) was directed to verify the stand of the petitioner with regard to his education and he has produced the details, which show that the petitioner is in the final semester of 3 year LLB programme in Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science, Padur, Kelambakkam.
5.
Considered the submissions on either side and perused the materials on record.
6.
It is evident that the petitioner was merely present at the time of quarrel between the said Karpagam and Sinthiyal Peter and did not 3\4
M. NIRMAL KUMAR,J.
nv do anything else. It is only a case of affray and nothing more. Hence, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings in Cr. No. 413 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police not only as against the petitioner/A2, but as against all the other accused as well.
7.
Accordingly, the criminal original petition stands allowed and the proceedings in Cr.No. 413/2025 stand quashed as against the petitioner as well as other accused. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
24.06.2026 nv To
1. The Inspector of Police, T4, Maduravoyal Police Station, Chennai.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
4\4