Kesavan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.(MD).No.15385 of 2025
1. Kesavan
2. Pushba
3. Karthi
4. Santhiya
5. Mohanasundaram ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 5 Vs.
1.The State through The Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District.
(in Cr.No.218 of 2022)
2. Vithyasri ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for records pertaining to the S.C.No.79 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Karur dated 28.10.2022 and quash the same as against the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr. S.Gokulraj For R-1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : M/s.S.Prabha 1/8
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the impugned Charge Sheet filed in Special S.C.No.79 of 2022 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Karur for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 355, 354, 506(i) of IPC and Sections 3(1), (xi) 3(1)(w), 3(i)(w), (ii), 3(1)(s), 3(2) (va), 3(2) (v) of SC/ST Act @ into sections 341, 294(b), 323, 355, 354, 506(i) and 376 of IPC and Sections 3 (1), (xi), 3(1)(w), 3(i) (w), (ii), 3(1)(s), 3(2), (va), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act.
2. The allegation against the first petitioner is that he and the defactocomplainant had a love affair; that the first petitioner on the promise to marry the defacto-complainant had sexual intercourse with her; that thereafter the first petitioner refused to marry the defacto-complainant; that when the defactocomplainant requested the first petitioner and his family members for solemnizing the marriage, they abused her by using her caste name and thus, they committed the aforesaid offences.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations would not attract any of the offences and that in any case the parties have entered into a compromise and prayed for quashing of the proceedings. 2/8
The learned Counsel for the second respondent would confirms that the second respondent does not wish to pursue the proceedings.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent would submit that though the second respondent has received the compensation of Rs.1,87,500/-, the second respondent remitted back the said amount to the Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department.
5. The parties have filed a joint compromise memo dated 23rd September 2025 and the scanned copy of the compromise memo reads as follows: 3/8
4/8
5/8
6/8
6. The petitioners, namely, Kesavan (Aadhaar No.3838 5156 8121), T.Pushpa (Aadhaar No.7557 0499 7402), M.Karthi (Aadhaar No.7089 4585 7838), S.Santhiya (Aadhaar No.5209 1793 8233) and R.Mohanasundaram (Aadhaar No.6774 0411 9946) and the second respondent, namely, M.Vithyasri (Aadhaar No.3453 6393 5543) are present before this Court in person. They are identified by Mr.T.Kannan, Special Sub Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District. All the parties confirmed the compromise arrived at between them.
7. In view of the same and considering the nature of the offences and the relationship between the parties, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned final report pending trial. Accordingly, the impugned final report in S.C.No.79 of 2022 dated 28.10.2022 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Karur is quashed and the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.
23.09.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No gvn 7/8
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
gvn To 1.The Principal District Judge, Karur
2. The Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
Crl.O.P(MD).No.15385 of 2025 23.09.2025 8/8