Karthick v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.06.2026 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Karthick .. Petitioner

Versus

1. State rep. By, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station - Perambalur, Perambalur District.

(Crime No.19 of 2019)

2. T.R.Gopinath, Legal Professionary Officer, District Child Protection Office, Perambalur District.

3. XXX .. Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the entire records in connection with the impugned final report in Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2019 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur and quash the same on the ground of compromise. For Petitioner : Ms.S.Rithika For Respondents : Mr.A.Amarnath, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side), for R1 1/6

ORDER

The petitioner / accused facing trial in Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2019 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur for the offences punishable under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006; Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) and 6 of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 366 and 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code, has filed this quash petition.

2. The contention of the petitioner / accused is that based on the complaint of the second respondent, a case in Crime No.19 of 2019 was registered by the first Respondent Police against the petitioner as the sole accused. Upon completion of the investigation, a final report was filed and taken on file in Spl.S.C. No. 86 of 2019 by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur, for alleged offences under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006; Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) and 6 of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 366 and 376(3) of I.P.C. However, it is submitted that the petitioner and victim were in love affair and that presently, victim attained majority and the parties lawfully married on 20.08.2023. They are currently leading a happy and peaceful matrimonial life and have been blessed with two minor 2/6

children. The victim girl is entirely unwilling to pursue the case against the petitioner, stating that the continuation of the trial would cause great mental agony and injustice to their family and children. The parties have entered into this compromise voluntarily without any coercion. Hence praying for quashing the case on the ground of compromise.

3. The learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Crl. Side) for the first respondent submitted that based on the complaint given by the second respondent, an F.I.R in Crime No.19 of 2019 has been registered and investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed in Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2019 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur for the offences under Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006; Sections 5(l), 5(j)(ii) and 6 of the Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 366 and 376(3) of I.P.C. He further submitted that now the case is at the stage of pending trial. In the meantime, both the petitioner and the third respondent arrived at a compromise and settled the issues between them.

4. Considering the submissions made by the parties and on perusal of entire materials, it is seen that the case is pending trial. At this 3/6

stage and also by passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and decided to compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

5. Today, the petitioner and the third respondent are present before this Court and their identity is confirmed by the first respondent Police. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. The parties have filed a joint compromise memo to that effect duly signed by both of them.

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "K.Dhandapani vs. State by the Inspector of Police reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1056", considered the subsequent events and observed that the Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb the happy family life of the petitioner/accused as well as the victim girl. In view of the same, this Court is of the view that allowing the petitioner and the victim girl to lead a happy family life would be the real justice. Both parties filed affidavits and Joint Compromise Memo to that effect.

4/6

7. In view of the above, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the criminal proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.86 of 2019 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur is quashed as against the petitioner. The petitioner is discharged from all charges.

8. The affidavits and the Joint Compromise Memo filed by the petitioners and the victim for compromising the offences shall form part of the records.

12.06.2026 Index : yes/no Speaking order/Non-speaking order : yes/no grs To

1. The Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Perambalur.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station - Perambalur, Perambalur District.

5/6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

grs 12.06.2026 6/6