Rifai @ Rifaideen v. The State Of Tamilnadu, Represented Through The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 17.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

1. Rifai @ Rifaideen,

2. Syed Ali,

3. Ameer Ali, ... Petitioners Vs.

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep., Through the Inspector of Police, (In Crime No.114 of 2025).

2. Salmankhan, ... Respondents PRAYER :- This Petition is filed under section 528 BNSS, to call for the records of impugned First Information Report in Crime No.114 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent No.1 Police Station and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioners.

For Petitioners : Mr.Prabakaran .P, For Respondents : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 : Mr.A.Abdul Kabur for R2 1/5

CRL OP(MD). No.20358 of 2025:

1. Althap @ Althaf,

2. Nazeer,

3. Shajahan, ... Petitioners Vs.

1. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, (In Crime No.117/2025).

2. Malik Mohamed,

3. Syed Ali, ... Respondents PRAYER :- This Petition is filed under section 528 BNSS, to call for the records of impugned FIR in Crime No.117/2025 on the file of the respondent No.1 Police Station, and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioners.

For Petitioners : Mr.A. Abdulkabur, For Respondents : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 : Mr.P.Prabakaran for R2 COMMON ORDER These Criminal Original Petitions are filed to quash the impugned F.I.Rs in Crime No.114 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 324(4) and 351(2) BNS; and in Crime No.117 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 333, 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 324 (4) and 351(3) BNS.

2/5

2. The accused in one case is the defacto complainant in the other case. The gist of the allegations is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners in both of the petitions, on the date of occurrence and they attacked each other and thus committed the aforesaid offences.

3. The learned counsels for the petitioners in both the cases would submit that the petitioners and the defacto complainant belong to same village and the parties have now arrived at a compromise and decided to give a quietus to the entire dispute. The parties have filed joint compromise memos dated 22.10.2025.

4. The petitioners and the defacto complainant in both the cases are present before this Court in person. They are identified by Mr.M.Devaraj, SSI, Thuckalay Police Station, Kanniyakumari District. All the parties confirmed the compromise arrived at between them.

5. Considering the nature of allegations, the relationship and the compromise arrived between the parties, this Court is of the view that no 3/5

useful purpose would be served in keeping the impugned investigation pending. Accordingly, the impugned F.I.Rs are quashed and the Criminal Original Petitions are allowed. The joint compromise memos dated 22.10.2025 shall form part and parcel of the orders. The petitioners shall jointly pay a cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) in each case to the credit of the "District Siddha Medical Officer, CCRI, Periyakulam" (Account No.10767823177, IFSC Code: SBIN0000898, MICR Code: 625002601) and file a photocopy of the receipt along with a memo reporting compliance in the Registry.

17.11.2025 NCC : Yes Index : Yes Internet : Yes LS TO

1. The Inspector of Police, 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

SUNDER MOHAN,J LS CRL OP(MD) Nos.20216 & 20358 of 2025 17.11.2025 5/5