Balakumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.(MD) No.6840 of 2025 and Crl.M.P(MD) No.4994 of 2025 Balakumar ... Petitioner/2nd Accused Vs.
1.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Keeranur Police Station, Pudukottai District.
Cr.No.14 of 2018.
... 1st Respondent/Complainant 2.Karnan ...2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records in C.C.No.136 of 2023 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For R-1 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor 1/8
ORDER
The petitioner seeks to quash the final report in C.C.No.136 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur, which was filed for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(i) of IPC and Section and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.
2. The allegation in the final report is that the defacto complainant and the third accused are brothers; that the accused Nos.1 and 2 are friends of the third accused; and that due to the dispute with regard to partition between the third accused and the defacto complainant, on 23.01.2018, at the instance of the third accused, the accused Nos.1 and 2 attacked the defaco complainant, abused him in filthy language, also threatened him with dire consequences and thus, committed the aforesaid offences.
3. It is reported that the defacto complainant is presently residing abroad and he is unable to be personally present today. The defacto complainant had filed an affidavit stating that he and the petitioner have now entered into a compromise and decided to give a quietus to the entire dispute. The scanned copy of the affidavit filed by the defacto complainant reads as follows: 2/8
3/8
4/8
5/8
4. The petitioner, namely, Balakumar and the second respondent's wife, namely, Suganthi are present before this Court in person. They are identified by Mr.K.Dharmalingam, Special Sub-Inspector of Police, Keeranur Police Station, Pudukkottai District. The said Suganthi, who is also a victim, confirmed that the defacto complainant also has agreed to compromise the issue with the petitioner.
6/8
5. In view of the same and considering the nature of the offences and the relationship between the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned final report pending trial. Accordingly, the impugned final report in C.C.No.136 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur, Pudukkottai District, is quashed as against the petitioner and the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 11.09.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Indu To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Keeranur, Pudukkottai District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Keeranur Police Station, Pudukottai District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
7/8
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
Indu Crl.O.P(MD).No.6840 of 2025 11.09.2025 8/8