Pushparaj @ Pushbaraj v. The State Of Tamilnadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16121 of 2025
1. Pushparaj @ Pushbaraj
2. Muthukumar
3. Janagiraman @ Janakiraman ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3 Vs.
1. The State of Tamilnadu, Represented by the Inspector of Police, Nagudi Police Station, Pudukkottai.
(Crime No. 156/2024) ...1st Respondent / Complainant
2. Neelavathy ... 2nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records relating to the charge sheet in S.C.No.158 of 2025 on the file of the Mahila Court, Pudukkottai and quash the same as the matter is amicably settled between parties.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ragul For R1 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.Udhaya Jeeva 1/9
ORDER
The petitioners seek to quash the final report in S.C.No.158 of 2025 on the file of the Mahila Court, Pudukkottai, which was filed for the offences under Sections 366, 354, 294(b), 323, 324 of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act.
2. The allegation in the final report is that the petitioners, who are the brother and close relatives of the husband of the defacto complainant; that they kidnapped the defacto complainant in a car and abused her in filthy language and caused hurt to her and thus, committed the aforesaid offences.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the dispute is primarily stems out of a matrimonial issue between the second respondent and her husband; that the petitioners are close relatives of the second respondent's husband; and that the parties have now entered into a compromise and decided to give a quietus to the entire dispute.
4. The parties have filed a joint compromise memo dated 24th September 2025 and the scanned copy of the compromise memo reads as follows: 2/9
3/9
4/9
5/9
6/9
5. The petitioners and the second respondent are present before this Court in person and are identified by Mr.G.Babu, Special Sub Inspector of Police, Nagudi Police Station, Pudukkottai District. The second respondent confirms the compromise and states that she has no objection for quashing the sessions case.
6. Considering the relationship of the parties and also considering the fact that now the second respondent is happily living with her husband and the dispute is private in nature, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the impugned final report pending trial. Accordingly, the impugned final report in S.C.No.158 of 2025 on the file of the Mahila Court, Pudukkottai, is quashed and the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. The petitioners shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) as costs to the High Court Legal Services Authority attached to this Bench forthwith and file a photocopy of the receipt along with a memo reporting compliance in the Registry.
24.09.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Indu 7/9
To 1.The Inspector of Police, Nagudi Police Station, Pudukkottai.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
8/9
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
Indu Crl.O.P(MD).No.16121 of 2025 24.09.2025 9/9