Nagarjun v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.04.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL and Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.6069 and 6072 of 2025

1. Nagarjun

2. Palaniyappan

3. Selvarani

4. Sekar

5. Kattammal

6. Rengasamy

7. Saranya .. Petitioners Vs.

1. The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Palani, Dindigul District

2. Muthammal Extension Officer Social Welfare Department Palani Panchayat Union Dindigul District

3. Divya Bharathi .. Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in Special S.C.No.22 of 2025 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dindigul and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned. 1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar No.1 Government Advocate(Crl.Side) No.3 : Mr.D.Venkatesh

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the charge sheet in Special S.C.No.22 of 2025 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dindigul

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsels appearing on either side and victim also present. Both the victim and the accused filed joint compromise memo stating that the first petitioner and the third respondent/ victim got married and now the victim is nine month pregnant. The victim and the first petitioner are now living together as husband and wife and the victim has no objection to quash the charge sheet.

3.Today both the parties present and this Court also enquired the victim as well as the first petitioner and both stated that they are living as husband and wife and she is now nine month pregnant. Therefore it is 2/6

appropriate to allow the petition based on the compromise arrived at between the parties.

4. At this juncture, it is relevant to refer the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.Dhandapani Vs. The State by the Inspector of Police reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1056, has held as follows:

"In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the considered view that the conviction and sentence of the appellant who is maternal uncle of the prosecutrix deserves to be set aside in view of the subsequent events that have been brought to the notice of this Court. This Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb the happy family life of the appellant and the prosecutrix. We have been informed about the custom in Tamilnadu of the marriage of a girl with the maternal uncle".

5.The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat) reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 were taken into consideration. 3/6

6. In view of the above said judgments and the fact that the first petitioner and the victim/third respondent are living together as husband and wife after marriage and now she is nine month pregnant and though charges are grave in nature, considering the relationship between the parties and the amicable settlement between themselves this Court is of the view that the compromise is to be accepted. Therefore inorder to meet the ends of justice by invoking inherent power of this Court, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the pending proceedings against the petitioners in Special S.C.No.22 of 2025 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dindigul is hereby quashed. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions stand closed.

30.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No aav 4/6

To

1. The Fast Track Mahila Court, Dindigul

2. The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Palani, Dindigul District 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P.DHANABAL,J.

aav 30.04.2025 6/6