Velmurugan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Velmurugan ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Madakupatti Police Station, Sivagangai District.

(Crime No. 119 of 2024).

2. Bebiya

3. Vijayanand ... Respondents *PRAYER: Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records in CC No.33 of 2025 in Crime No. 119 of 2024 on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Sivagangai and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr. C.Ramesh For Respondents : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi(R1) Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Mr.S.Muniyandi(R2) (*Amended as per order of this Court in Crl.M.P(MD) No.5523 of 2025, dated 24.04.2025) 1/5

O R D E R

This petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No.33 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Sivagangai for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 336, 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.119 of 2024 and quash the same.

2. According to the petitioners, the petitioners and defacto complainant are relatives. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the police has registered FIR in Cr.No. 119 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 336, 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act. It is a case and case in counter.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel on both sides represented that during pendency of the case in C.C.No.33 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, victim/3rd respondent and all 2/5

the petitioners are present and the Court enquired about the terms of compromise. The defacto-complainant represented that they entered into a compromise as they are relatives. A compromise memo, dated 24.04.2025 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 the parties have also entered into a compromise, it is appropriate to allow this petition.

7. Recording the said compromise memo, this petition is allowed and C.C.No.33 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Sivagangai is quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned.

24.04.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No PNM 3/5

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Sivagangai 2.The Inspector of Police, Madakupatti Police Station, Sivagangai District.

(Crime No. 119 of 2024).

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

PNM ORDER IN 24.04.2025 5/5