Hareesh v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR 1.Hareesh 2.Devika 3.C.P.Rajineesh ... Petitioners Vs.
1.
The State of Tamil Nadu represented by, The Inspector of Police, W-7, AWPS, Anna Nagar Police Station Chennai Crime No.28 of 2025 2.
Redacted ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records to quash the FIR in Cr.No.28 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent.
For Petitioner :
Mr.S.N.Subramani For R1 :
Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 :
Mr.B.Kamalesh for R2
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the Cr.No.587 of 2021 pending on the file of the first respondent and quash the same as against the petitioners for the alleged offences under Sections 85 of BNS (498A of IPC) and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on the ground of joint 1/4
compromise entered into between them.
2. The petitioners and the de-facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and were identified by their respective counsel as well as by M/s.P.Lakshmisri, Special Sub-Inspector of Police, W-7, AWPS, Anna Nagar Police Station, Chennai.
3. On being enquired by this Court, the defacto complainant stated that he has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioners and he is not willing to pursue the the criminal proceedings and therefore, seeks to quash the same.
4. 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 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 482 of Cr.P.C, 2/4
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.
5. 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.
6. In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The FIR in Cr.No.28 of 2025 pending on the file of the first respondent is quashed as against the petitioners. The Memorandum of Compromise filed by the petitioners and the second respondent for compromising the offences shall form part of the record.
06.10.2025 dhk N. SATHISH KUMAR , J.
3/4
To
1. The Inspector of Police, W-7, AWPS, Anna Nagar Police Station Chennai
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
06.10.2025 4/4