← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/6065/2025allowed

Naganathan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

2025-04-24Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL and Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.4416 and 4417 of 2025 1.Naganathan 2.Ravichandran 3.Kannan @ Suresh Kannan 4.Boominathan ... petitionerss Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Devakottai All Women Police Statio, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.

Crime No. 1/2015.

2. Pushpavalli ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records pertaining to the case in C.C No. 94/2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai district and quash the same as illegal. For petitioners : Mr. B.Jameelarasu For Respondents : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi(R1) Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Ms.S.Prabha Legal aid counsel (R2) 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.94 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai District for the offences under Sections 498(A), 406, 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.1 of 2015 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. 1 of 2015 for the offences under Sections 498(A), 406, 506(ii) 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 counsels on both sides represented that during pendency of the case in C.C.No.94 of 2015, 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.

2/5

4. Today, the defacto-complainant and 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 25.04.2025 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.94 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai District is quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 24.04.2025 Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No PNM 3/5

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, Sivagangai 2.The Inspector of Police, Devakottai All Women Police Statio, Devakottai, Sivagangai District.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

PNM ORDER IN and Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.4416 and 4417 of 2025 24.04.2025 5/5