Ramadoss v. The State Rep by

JUDGEMENT When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the petitioner appeared along with his counsel, and the victim appeared along with her mother. Admittedly, the petitioner and the defacto complainant are husband and wife, and the victim girl is their daughter.

¶2As on date, the petitioner is serving as a Village Administrative Officer

(VAO) under Arakkonam Taluk. It appears that, while under the influence of alcohol, he caused disturbances in the family, which led to the lodging of the present complaint. However, it is now submitted that the petitioner has resumed his duties after the suspension was cancelled, and he is presently taking care of the entire family. The same has also been admitted by the wife/defacto complainant.

¶3The victim girl has expressed before this Court that she wishes to live peacefully with her parents and is not inclined to proceed further with the case. A compromise memo has been filed, duly signed by both the petitioner and the defacto complainant, indicating that the petitioner has refrained from consuming alcohol. The victim girl, who is studying in the first year of BBA, has also affirmed before this Court that her father, the petitioner, has not consumed alcohol in recent times.

¶4Since the parties are now living together harmoniously, there is no necessity to continue the penal proceedings. In order to enable the family to live peacefully, keeping the prosecution alive would serve no useful purpose. Relying upon the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, this Court finds that there is no need to keep the case pending when the parties have amicably settled the issue.

¶5Accordingly, the joint memo of compromise is recorded, and the case is directed to be quashed. The petitioner is acquitted and ordered to be released from all charges.

¶6In view of the above, this Criminal Appeal is disposed of. 12-11-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rri To

1.The State Rep by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Arakkonam, Cr.No.7 of 2023

¶2Sessions Judge, Special Court (The Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act of 2012) Vellore.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. T.V.THAMILSELVI J. rri

12-11-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12-11-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI 1. RAMADOSS S/o.Ranganathan, Residing at No.48, Chinna Street, Avaloor Colony, Perumbulipakkam Post, Nemeli Taluk, Ranipet Distirct. Appellant(s) Vs 1. The State Rep by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Arakkonam, Cr.No.7 of 2023 Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Appeal filed under Section 415 of BNSS Act 2024, praying to call for records in SPL.S.C.No.133/2023 on the file of Sessions Judge, Special Court (The Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act of 2012) Vellore and set- aside the conviction and sentence passed on dated 25/06/2024 and thus render Justice. For Appellant(s): Mr.M.P.Jayaprakash For Respondent(s): Mr.V.Meganathan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)