Puthiyavan 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.4715 of 2025 1.Puthiyavan 2.Kamalesh 3.Yoganath ... Petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 Vs.

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

(Cr. No.31 of 2025) 2.Manikandan ... Respondents 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.31 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.B.P.Raghavan Page No. 1 of 5

For Respondents : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 Mr.Dhilipan Pandian for R2 *****

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.31 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.

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.31 of 2025 for the offences under Sections 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsels on both sides represented that during pendency of the case in Cr.No.31 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 Page No. 2 of 5

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.

7. Recording the said compromise memo, this petition is allowed and Cr.No.31 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, is quashed. 17.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd Page No. 3 of 5

To 1.The Inspector of Police Pateeswaram Police Station Thanjavur.

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

Page No. 4 of 5

P.DHANABAL,J apd Crl.OP(MD) No.4715 of 2025 17.03.2025 Page No. 5 of 5