Sivashangar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. O.P(MD) No.7892 of 2025 and CRL. MP(MD)Nos.5922 & 5923 of 2025 1.Sivashangar 2.C.V.K.Balakrishnan 3.Jeyarani ... Petitioners Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tallakulam Madurai Crime No.24 of 2016 2.Jenifa rani ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to call for the records in C.C.No.12 of 2017 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Madurai and quash the same as against the petitioners. Page No. 1 of 5

For petitioners : Mr. Niranjan S.Kumar For R1 : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.R.Manoharan *****

O R D E R

This petition has been filed by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No.12 of 2017 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Madurai for the offences under Sections 498(A), 294(b), 506(i) of IPC, in Crime No.24 of 2016 and quash the same.

2. According to the petitioners, the first petitioner and defacto complainant are husband and wife. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the police has registered FIR in Cr.No. 26 of 2016 for the offences under Sections 498(A), 294(b), 506(i) of IPC.

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.12 of 2017, 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 husband and wife. A compromise memo, dated 16.04.2025 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.12 of 2017 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Madurai, is quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

29.04.2025 Page No. 3 of 5

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To 1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tallakulam Madurai.

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.7892 of 2025 29.04.2025 Page No. 5 of 5