Mohesh v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

1. Mohesh

2. Anish

3. K.Vimal Kumar

4. K.Prabhu @ Samathana Prabhu Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Sub Inspector of Police B2, Otteri Police Station, Otteri, Chennai.

2.Raguraman Respondent(s)

PRAYER To call for the records in connection with Crime No. 652/2024 pending investigation on the file of Sub - Inspector of Police, B2 Otteri Police Station, Otteri, Chennai and Quash the same.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Sri Ganesh For Respondent(s):

Mr.R.Vinothraja, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side), for R1 R2-appeared in person

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the Crime No. 652 of 2024 pending on the file of the first respondent for the offences under sections 296(b), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS Act 2023.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that on 22.07.2024, a Temple festival was going on in the petitioner's area. At that time, a wordy quarrel arose between the first petitioner and the de-facto complainant, which resulted in assaulting each other. Subsequently, the petitioners 2 to 4 came there and joined with the first petitioner and assaulted the de-facto complainant. Hence, an FIR came to be registered against the petitioners.

3. The petitioners have stated that the petitioners and the defacto complainant amicably settled the issues between them and hence, seek to quash the Final Report as against the petitioners. The petitioners also filed Joint Memo of Compromise executed between the petitioners and the second respondent.

4. Mr.G.Kamaladasan, Sub Inspector, P2-Otteri Police Station, Chennai was present before this Court and informed that the defacto complainant and the petitioners had approached him and informed that since they have amicably settled the dispute between them, they do not want to proceed further with the criminal proceedings.

5. The Defacto Complainant and the petitioners are present before this Court at the time of hearing. This Court enquired the defacto complainant and he stated that he had amicably settled the dispute with the petitioners and he is not willing to proceed with the the criminal proceedings and seeks to quash the same.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. 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.

7. 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 petitioner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath, 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 528 of BNS Act, 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 it gets settled between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court.

8. In the present case, the offence in question are purely individual/personal in nature. It involves dispute between the petitioners and the defacto complainant 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. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash the First Information Report registered in Crime No.652 of 2024 pending on the file of the first respondent in exercise of its jurisdiction under 528 of BNSS Act.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the First Information Report registered in Crime No.652 of 2024 pending on the file of the first respondent, is quashed. The Joint Memo of Compromise filed by the

petitioners and the second respondent for compromising the offences shall form part of the records.

26-09-2025 pvs Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To The Sub Inspector of Police B2, Otteri Police Station, Otteri, Chennai.

N.SATHISH KUMAR J.

pvs CRL OP No. 26645 of 26-09-2025