Chelladurai @ Selvendran v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. O.P(MD) No.4872 of 2025 1.Chelladurai @ Selvendran 2.Sathish @ Sathish Kumar 3.Vinoth @ Vinoth Kumar 4.Sooni @ Manimaran 5.Manikandan.

... Petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Kumbakonam Sub Division, Thanjavur.

2.The State of Tamil Nadu Inspector of Police Pateeswaram Police Station Thanjavur.

(Cr. No.35 of 2025) 3.Puthiyavan 4.Kamalesh Kannan 5.Pandiyarajan Veeraiyan 6.Kalaivalavan kalaimani.

... Respondents Page No. 1 of 5

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No.35 of 2025, pending on the file of the first respondent Inspector of Police, Pateeswaram Police Station, Thanjavur and quash the same as far as the petitioner is concerned. For petitioners : Mr. R.L.Dhilipan Pandian For Respondents : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 & R2 Mr.Siva for R3 *****

O R D E R

This petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to the case in Crime No.35 of 2025, pending on the file of the first respondent Inspector of Police, Pateeswaram Police Station, Thanjavur and quash the same as far as the petitioners are concerned.

2. According to the petitioners, the petitioners and defacto complainant are neighbours. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the police has registered FIR in Cr.No.35 of 2025 for the offences under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 126(2), 115(2) and 118(1) of BNS Page No. 2 of 5

and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel on both sides represented that during pendency of the case in Cr.No.35 of 2025, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and to that effect, they have entered into a compromise and the same was filed before this Court.

4. Today, the defacto-complainant and all the accused are present and the Court enquired about the terms of compromise. The defactocomplainant represented that they entered into a compromise as they are neighbours. A compromise memo, dated 17.03.2025 signed by the parties and their respective counsels, is also filed before this Court.

5. This Court has perused the terms of the compromise memo.

6. Considering the nature of the offences, the relationship between the parties and they have also entered into a compromise, it is appropriate to allow this petition.

Page No. 3 of 5

7. Recording the said compromise memo, this petition is allowed and Cr.No.35 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, is quashed. 17.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Kumbakonam Sub Division, Thanjavur.

2.The Inspector of Police Pateeswaram Police Station Thanjavur.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Page No. 4 of 5

P.DHANABAL,J apd Crl.OP(MD) No.4872 of 2025 17.03.2025 Page No. 5 of 5