State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By Inspector Of Police Awps., Marthandam. v. Varun

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATE : 19.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN (C.C.No.430 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Kuzhithurai Taluk, Kanniyakumari District) The Sub-Inspector of Police, AWPS-Marthandam Police Station, Kanniyakumari.

(Crime No.14 of 2019) ... Petitioner Vs.

1.Varun 2.Vijayakumar ... Respondents Upon perusing the documents and case records of the above C.C.No.430 of 2019 transmitted to this Court and hearing the arguments of Mr.S.Ravi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on behalf of the State, this Court has passed the following 1/6

ORDER

Prelude:

"This dedicated bench is for implementing the pilot project to identify and dispose of criminal cases involving offences punishable with imprisonment up to 3 years pending at trial, appeal or revision stage for more than 3 years and also offences like Section 506(ii) of IPC and others, which may carry a punishment of more than 3 years in the State of Tamil Nadu with reference to the 14 Districts coming under the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court".

2.This Dedicated Bench has taken the C.C.No.430 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Kuzhithurai Taluk, Kanniyakumari District as Suo motu Special Tr.Case.(MD) No.13285 of 2025 in Suo Motu W.P.(Crl.).(MD).No.1014 of 2025, upon proper scrutinity this court feels that it is a fit case for warranting the exercise of power under Article 226 of Constitution of India to quash the said S.T.C., which is pending for more than six years without any progress. 2/6

3.Brief facts of the prosecution case in C.C.No.430 of 2019: In this case, the accused and his family are alleged to have continuously subjected the complainant to cruelty and harassment for dowry demands, which ultimately led to the dissolution of the marriage. Therefore, a case was registered in Crime No.14 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 and 506(1) of IPC and Sections 3(1), 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, and on investigation, final report was filed and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.430 of 2019 and the same is pending without trial for more than six years.

4.Discussion:

4.1.Both the complainant and the Inspector of Police appeared through video conference and the complainant submitted that he has settled the issues with the accused and both are living peacefully and agreed to close the case. He also stated that he is consenting for compromise without any coercion and also this Court on noting the demeanor of the complainant, finds no chance for coercion or threat. 3/6

4.2.Mr.S.Ravi, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submitted that the accused has no previous antecedents. 4.3.Due to the petty dispute between them, the complainant made a complaint and final report was filed and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.430 of 2019 and pending for more than six years. Both parties buried the hatchet without being influenced and filed the compromise memo. Considering that the dispute is trivial in nature and now both the complainant and accused have settled their dispute voluntarily without any threat or coercion, and living peacefully and since the case comes within the parameters of law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs.

Laxmi Narayan and Others reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688 and other related judgments and the case is pending without trial for more than six years and continuation of the trial by examining the witnesses would lead to wastage of time and wastage of Government exchequer and also lead to docket explosion without adjudication and the chance of conviction even after the full-fledged trial would also is bleak, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

4/6

5.Accordingly, the C.C.No.430 of 2019 on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Kuzhithurai Taluk, Kanniyakumari District is quashed and this Suo Motu Transfer case stands closed. 19.09.2025 pal electronically alone. The Trial Court shall take note of the order and accordingly classify the case pending before them as allowed / dismissed / disposed of, etc, and while doing so, consider any applications such as disposal of properties, etc., and pass appropriate orders, as may be necessary. Further, the Court below is directed to dispatch the copy of this order to all concerned.

5/6

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN ,J.

pal Order made in SUO MOTU Tr. (MD).No.13285 of 2025 19.09.2025 6/6