R.Manikandan v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR R.Manikandan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.
The State of Tamil Nadu represented by, The Inspector of Police, SRMC AWPS, Avadi Crime No.159 of 2019 2.
Sri Vaishnavi ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to Cr.No.1 of 2024 on the file of the Inspector of Police, SRMC AWPS, Avadi and quash the same. For Petitioner :
Mr.L.Ambruse For R1 :
Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to to call for the records relating to Cr.No.1 of 2024 against the petitioner for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 420 & 506(1) of IPC on 1/4
the file of the first respondent police Sub-Inspector of Police, Semmancheri Police Station and quash the same based on the compromise arrived between the parties.
2. The crux of the allegations in the FIR is that the petitioner and the defacto complainant had married together and due to death of their baby, disputes arose between them and the accused had assaulted and abused her. Hence, the FIR.
3. The petitioner and the de-facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and were identified by the counsel as well as by M/s.K.Gracy, Women Special Sub-Inspector of Police, SRMC, AWPS, Avadi.
4. On being enquired by this Court, the defacto complainant stated that she has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioner as they have got divorce by mutual consent and now, she is not willing to pursue the the criminal proceedings and therefore, seeks to quash the same.
5. The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to 2/4
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 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 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 it gets settled between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court.
6. In the present case, the offences in question are purely individual/personal in nature. It involves dispute between the petitioners 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.
N. SATHISH KUMAR , J.
3/4
7. In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The FIR in Cr.No.1 of 2024 pending on the file of the first respondent is quashed as against the petitioner. The Joint Compromise Memo filed by the petitioner and the second respondent for compromising the offences shall form part of the record.
14.10.2025 dhk To
1. The Inspector of Police, SRMC AWPS, Avadi
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
4/4