Andisamy v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. O.P(MD) No.7267 of 2025 1.Andisamy 2.Sathasivam ... Petitioners Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu rep.by the Inspector of Police, Palayanoor Police Station, Sivagangai District.

Crime No.126 of 2020 2.Kalaiselvi ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in C.C.No.90 of 2023 before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppuvanam and quash the same as illegal as far as the petitioners are concerned. For petitioners : Mr.V.Malaiyendran For R1 : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.S.Paul Murugesh Page No. 1 of 5

*****

O R D E R

This petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No.90 of 2023 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruppuvanam for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(1) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, in Crime No.126 of 2020 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. 126 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(1) 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 case in C.C.No.90 of 2023, 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 represented that they entered into a compromise as they are relatives and she has no objection in allowing this petition. A compromise memo, dated 21.04.2025 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 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 C.C.No.90 of 2023 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruppuvanam, is quashed as against these petitioners alone.

22.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd Page No. 3 of 5

To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppuvanam.

2.The Inspector of Police, Palayanoor Police Station, Sivagangai District.

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.7267 of 2025 22.04.2025 Page No. 5 of 5