Anbalagan v. State Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

1. ANBALAGAN Son of Palani, No.2/202, Ponniyamman Koil Street, Kollaimedu, (VP Mahal Backside), Vanjur, Senur, Vellore District - 632 006.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station Vellore, Vellore District.

In Crime No.11 of 2025 2.Redacted Respondent(s) 1/7

PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records in relation to the First Information Report in Crime No.11 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent and to quash the same. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.M.R. Thangavel For R1 Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 Appeared in person

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in relation to the First Information Report in Crime No.11 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent and to quash the same.

2. It is the case of the defacto complainant that she is working as Guest Lecturer in a private college at Vellore. The petitioner herein is the Head of the Department (Economics) in the same college. The petitioner taking advantage of his position, committed sexual harassment to the defacto complainant. Further the petitioner had induced the defacto complainant to transfer a sum of Rs.1,76,000/- under the guise of securing permanent job to her in the college. 2/7

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has settled the dispute with the de facto complainant amicably and hence, seeks to quash the First Information Report as against him. A Joint Memo of nd Compromise has been executed between the petitioner and the 2 respondent/defacto complainant to that effect.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent-Police. The nd petitioner/accused is present before this Court. The de facto complainant/2 respondent is also present before this Court today and they are identified by their respective counsel as well as by Mrs.P.Maheswari, AWPS, , who is also present before this Court.

5. 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 FIR.

6. Now, 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, based on a compromise. 3/7

The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujarath, reported in 2017 9 SCC 641 and in case of The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10, has given sufficient guidelines that must be taken into consideration by the High Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./Section 528 BNSS, to quash non-compoundable offence(s). One very important test that has been laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine as to whether 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 it gets settled between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court. 7.

However, in the present case, the wrong is basically to the victim. The offender and the victim have now settled all the dispute between them amicably. Further, the petitioner as well as the de facto complainant have filed separate affidavits to the effect that they have entered into this compromise to ensure a well-being and peaceful future.

proceedings will not serve any purpose and it would only prolong distress for all concerned, especially when the de facto complainant has specifically mentioned that she had settled the issues with the petitioner so as to maintain the harmony in their life in future. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash the FIR in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS. 8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the First st respondent Information Report in Crime No.11 of 2025 on the file of the 1 Police, as against the petitioner, for the offences under Sections 75, 78, 115(2), 316(2) and 318(4) of BNS and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act is quashed. The Joint Memo of Compromise filed by the petitioner nd respondent and the individual affidavits filed by the petitioner and and the 2 nd respondent shall form part of the records. the 2 06-10-2025 mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes 5/7

To

1. The Sub Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station Vellore, Vellore District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai.

6/7

N.SATHISH KUMAR J.

mfa CRL OP No. 26635 of 06-10-2025 7/7