Arunachalam Suna Pana v. State Represented By,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.09.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR and Crl.M.P.No.16916 of 2025 1.
Arunachalam Suna Pana 2.
S.P.Valliammai 3.
Sivagami ... Petitioners Vs.
1.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, W-33 All Women Police Station, Virugambakkam Police Station, Chennai - 600 093. (Crime No.18 of 2025) 2.
Meena Rukmani ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C/528 of BNSS, to call for the records in Crime No.18 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent Police and quash the same as against the petitioners.
For Petitioner :
Mr.G.Gokul For R1 : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For R2 :
Mr.C.Arun Kumar 1/6
O R D E R
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.18 of 2025, pending on the file of the first respondent, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioners and the de facto complainant/second respondent. 2.
Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 3.
Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant/R2, a case in Crime No.18 of 2025 was registered for the offences under Sections 498(A) and 406 IPC.
4.
Learned counsel appearing on either side submitted that the petitioners have settled the dispute with the de facto complainant/second respondent amicably and filed a Memorandum of Compromise dated 13.08.2025. Based on the said compromise memo, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, disposed of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal in C.M.A.No.831 of 2025 vide order dated 14.08.2025 and granted a decree of divorce. Therefore, seek to quash the First Information Report. 2/6
5.
The petitioners and the de-facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and were identified by their respective counsel. 6.
On being enquired by this Court, the de facto complainant stated that she has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioners and she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings against the petitioners and therefore, seeks to quash the same.
7.
The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that though the parties entered into a compromise while this case is pending, this Court, taking into account the seriousness of the offence has to consider the issue as to whether an offence of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.
8.
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 and in case of The State of 3/6
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. 9.
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.
10. In view of the above, this Court, considering the fact that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court accepting the Memorandum of Compromise filed by the parties, disposed the C.M.A.No.831 of 2025 in terms of the Memorandum of Compromise on 14.08.2025, is inclined to 4/6
quash the First Information Report registered in Crime No.18 of 2025 pending on the file of the first respondent in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
11. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The First Information Report in Crime No.18 of 2025 pending on the file of the first respondent, is quashed as against the petitioners. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11.09.2025 ham To
1. The Inspector of Police, W-33 All Women Police Station, Virugambakkam Police Station, Chennai - 600 093.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5/6
N. SATHISH KUMAR , J.
ham and Crl.M.P.No.16916 of 2025 11.09.2025 6/6