J.Jagadeesh v. Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

1. J.Jagadeesh

2. Jeyachandran

3. Kannagi

4. Prakatheesh

5. Bhuvaneshwari

6. Venkadesh

7. Padmapriya ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Ashok Nagar, Chennai.

2. Rasika ..Respondent(s) To call for the records relating to the C.C.No.10016/2018 on the file of the XXIII MM, Saidapet and quash the same and pass such other orders as this Honble Court.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Venkatesan, for M/s.K.Sundararaj For Respondent(s):

Mr.R.Rajasekaran, G.A.(Crl. Side), for R1 Mr.K.G.Senthil Kumar, for R2

ORDER

The petitioners, who are facing trial for the offences under Sections 498(A), 406, 507, 294(b) of IPC in CC.No.10016 of 2018 on the file of the learned XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, have filed this Criminal Original Petition to quash the criminal proceedings. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the first petitioner and the second respondent was solemised on 30.10.2014. No child was born out of the wedlock. It is alleged that the first petitioner abused the second respondent and her family members in filthy language, assaulted her, and ultimately drove her out of the matrimonial home. Based on the complaint lodged by the second respondent, a case was registered in Crime No.5 of 2018 against the petitioners, who are the husband and in-laws of the second respondent. Upon completion of the investigation, a final report was filed by the respondent Police and the same has been taken on file as CC.No.10016 of 2018 on the file of the learned XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

3. During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, the second respondent initiated proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act in D.V.C.No.96 of 2020, while the first petitioner instituted O.P.No.266 of 2020. Subsequently, the parties amicably resolved all their disputes and decided to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent. Accordingly, they jointly filed O.P.No.5471 of 2022 before the VII Additional Family Court, Chennai seeking dissolution of marriage by mutual consent.

4. As part of the settlement, the first petitioner paid a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- to the second respondent towards full and final settlement of permanent alimony and they also exchanged their respective articles. The parties agreed that neither of them would have any further claim against each other. Pursuant to the settlement, the second respondent withdrew D.V.C.No.96 of 2020 and the first petitioner withdrew O.P.No.266 of 2020. They further agreed to take necessary steps for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.10016 of 2018. Recording the terms of settlement, family granted a divorce by mutual consent. The order of the Family Court is scanned and extracted hereunder:

5. Thereafter, the second respondent filed an affidavit dated 29.10.2025 before this Court expressing that the dispute had been amicably settled and stating that she has no objection to quashing the criminal proceedings. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the second respondent submitted that the said affidavit has been filed in terms of the undertaking given before the Family Court in O.P.No.5471 of 2022. The affidavit is scanned and extracted hereunder:

6.The learned Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent submitted that based on complaint of the second respondent, the criminal case came to be registered against the petitioner. He further submitted that though the parties have entered into a compromise, this Court, taking into account the seriousness of the offence, has to consider as to whether offences of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties. 7.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 8.The criminal case is still at the stage of trial. In the meanwhile, the parties have amicably settled their matrimonial dispute. The petitioner and the second respondent/defacto complainant appeared before this Court and were duly identified by their respective counsel. On interaction by this Court, the second respondent/defacto complainant stated that the dispute has been settled amicably and that she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings and therefore, seeks to quash the same.

9.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 petitioners. 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 noncompoundable 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.

10. In the present case, the allegations arise out of a matrimonial dispute between the parties. The parties have voluntarily settled all their disputes, obtained a decree of divorce by mutual consent, and have resolved all ancillary issues. The second respondent also expressed before this Court that she has no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings. Therefore, this Court is satisfied that the dispute is purely personal in nature and that continuation of the prosecution would serve no useful purpose. Quashing the proceedings would not affect any overriding public interest.

11.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the proceedings in CC.No.1033 of 2023 on the file of the learned XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, is quashed.

12.The affidavit filed by the second respondent dated 29.10.2025 shall form part of the records.

25-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order PVS

To

1. The XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai

2. VII Additional Family Court, Chennai

3. Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, Ashok Nagar, Chennai.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

PVS 25-06-2026