Deepakraj R v. The State Rep.By, the Sub Inspector of Police,

ORDER The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.3627 of 2025, pending against the petitioners, on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate Court No-XIII, Egmore, Chennai, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioners and the de facto complainant/second respondent.

¶2Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶3In order to have an effective and complete adjudication of the issue raised in this writ petition, this Court suo motu impleads Reeta Nandhini as the 3rd respondent in this writ petition.

¶4Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant/R2, a case in Crime No.334 of 2024 was registered on the file of the first respondent Police against the petitioners, for the offences under Sections 341, 294(b) and 323 of IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. After completion of investigation, a final report was filed by the first respondent police which was taken cognizance, as stated in the opening paragraph.

¶5Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as for the de facto complainant submitted that on the advice of elders and well wishers, the parties have now amicably settled the issue among themselves. Hence, they seek to quash the proceedings as against the petitioners. Affidavits and Joint Memo of Compromise to that effect have also been filed.

¶6The petitioners and the de facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsel as well as by Ms.K.Devi, WSSI, V5-Thirumangalam Police Station, Chennai.

¶7On being enquired by this Court, the de facto complainant stated that she has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioners and she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings and therefore, seeks to quash the same.

¶8Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that though the parties have entered into a compromise while this case is pending, this Court, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, has to consider the issue as to whether offences of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.

¶9The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences pending against the petitioners. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641, has given sufficient guidelines that must be taken into consideration by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 528 BNSS), to quash non-compoundable offences. One very important test that has been laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine if the crime in question is purely individual in nature or a crime against the society with overriding public interest. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that offences against the society with overriding public interest even if they get settled between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court.

¶10In the present case, the offences in question are purely individual/personal in nature. It involves dispute between the petitioners and the second respondent and quashing the proceedings will not affect any overriding public interest in this case and no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.3627 of 2025 pending on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate Court No-XIII, Egmore, Chennai, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 BNSS.

¶11Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of and the proceedings in C.C.No.3627 of 2025 pending on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate Court No-XIII, Egmore, Chennai, is quashed as against the petitioners, on condition that the petitioners pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) jointly as costs to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority (TNSLSA), High Court Campus, Chennai 600 104, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶12The affidavits and the Joint Memo of Compromise filed by the petitioners and the second respondent for compromising the offences shall form part of the records.

25.02.2026 vm Note: Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment in the cause title. To

¶1The Metropolitan Magistrate Court No-XIII, Egmore, Chennai.

¶2The Inspector of Police, V-5. Thirumangalam Police Station, Chennai.

¶3The Member Secretary, The Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority (TNSLSA), High Court Campus, Chennai.

¶4The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

, J.

vm

25.02.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.02.2026 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and Crl.M.P.Nos.2030 & 2031 of 2026 1.Deepakraj R 2.Aarthi Chander C 3.Joice Esther B 4.L.Bhuvaneshpandi ... Petitioners/Accused-1,2,3 & 4 Vs. 1. The State by Rep. By Sub-Inspector of Police, V-5, Thirumangalam Police Station, Chennai. … Respondent/Complainant 2. Preethi Kumari ... Respondent/Defacto Complainant 3. Reeta Nandhini (R3-suo motu impleaded by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.2960 of 2026 vide order dated 25.02.2026 by ADJCJ) P rayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to call for the entire records pertaining to the proceedings in C.C.No.3627 of 2025 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate Court No-XIII, Egmore, Chennai and to quash the same. For Petitioners : Mr.K.N.Nataraaj For R1 : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.R.Yuvaraj For R3 : Mr.K.Praveen Raj