Jancy Mariyal 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.4877 of 2025 1.Jancy Mariyal 2.Charles 3.John Vincent ... Petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Inspector of Police Thiruchuli Police Station Virudhunagar.

(Cr. No.198 of 2022) 2.Y.Gnanamuthammal ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to call for the records in connection with the case in C.C.No.52 of 2024, on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchuli and quash the same.

For petitioners : Mr.B.Senthilkumar For Respondents : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 Mr.M.Balaji for R2 Page No. 1 of 5

*****

O R D E R

The petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No.52 of 2024, on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchuli, for the offences under Sections 324, 506(2) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.198 of 2022 and quash the same.

2. According to the petitioners, the petitioners and defacto complainant are neighbours. Based on the complaint given by the second respondent, the police has registered FIR in Cr.No. 198 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 324, 506(2) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel on both sides represented that during pendency of the cases in C.C.No.52 of 2024, 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.

Page No. 2 of 5

4. Today, the defacto-complainant and all the accused are present and the Court enquired about the terms of compromise. The defactocomplainant in both cases represented that they entered into a compromise as they are neighbours. The compromise memo, dated 10.03.2025 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, along with counter case, it is appropriate to allow this petition.

7. Recording the said compromise memo, the petition is allowed and C.C.No.52 of 2024, on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchuli, are quashed. 17.03.2025 NCC : Yes/No (1/2) Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd Page No. 3 of 5

To 1.Inspector of Police Thiruchuli Police Station Virudhunagar.

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

3.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchuli.

Page No. 4 of 5

P.DHANABAL,J apd Crl.OP(MD) No.4877 of 2025 17.03.2025 (1/2) Page No. 5 of 5