Pradap Jagan .R v. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner/accused in crime No.1 of 2026 for offences under Sections 85, 316(2) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, filed this quash petition.

2.The case against the petitioner is that the second respondent/defacto complainant, who is the wife of the petitioner, married to the petitioner on

12.09.2019 and they have two children. The petitioner is employed in Geological Survey of India. The defacto complainant lodged a complaint that she was attacked with a belt, slapped and pushed and threatened by the petitioner. It was also alleged that the petitioner was excessively obsessed with pornography. Further, the petitioner was also treading towards wrongful path, which was questioned by the defacto complainant and petitioner not taking care of the defacto complainant and the children, further it was suspected that the petitioner was having extra marital affair, hence, complaint lodged.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had applied for Anticipatory bail before the Principal Sessions Court, after registration of the case and during the pendency of the proceedings, the matter was referred to Mediation. In the Mediation, the issue got resolved between the petitioner and the defacto complaint. Now, both of them are living happily as husband and wife. Page3 of 8

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor confirms that the petitioner and the defacto complainant are living happily as husband and wife. Now, the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant resolved by way of settlement agreement before the Principal Sessions Court, Chennai in Crl.M.P.Nos.1477, 1535 & 1882 of 2026.

5.The petitioner and the second respondent/defacto complainant appeared before this Court and were identified by their respective counsel. The defacto complainant confirmed the compromise arrived.

¶6Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that the matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant has been resolved through Mediation and the parties have entered into a settlement agreement dated 13.03.2026 before the Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.M.P.Nos.1477, 1534 & 1882 of 2026 and the same is scanned and extracted hereunder: Page4 of 8 Page5 of 8 Page6 of 8 Page7 of 8

7.In view of the above, the case in crime No.1 of 2026 pending on the file of the first respondent police is quashed and the criminal original petition is allowed in terms of the above settlement agreement dated 13.03.2026 entered between the parties. 28-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order sms To

¶1The Principal Sessions Court, Chennai.

¶2The Inspector of Police W.30 AWPS Neelankarai, Adyar, Chennai .Cr.No. 1/26.

¶3The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o10637oofo2026 M.NIRMALoKUMAR,oJ. sms CRLoOPoNo.o10637oofo2026 28-04-2026 Page8oofo8

Page1 of 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Pradap Jagan .R S/o.Rayappan, No. 49, Block 7, CPWD Quarters, 3rd Avenue, Indira Nagar, Adyar, Chennai -20. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police W.30 AWPS Neelankarai, Adyar, Chennai .Cr.No. 1/26. 2. Roseline Seles Mary W/o.Pradap jagan, No. 49, Block 7, CPWD Quarters, 3rd Avenue ,Indira Nagar, Chennai -20. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: This criminal original petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act to call for the record and quash the FIR in Cr.No. 1/2026 pending on the file of Inspector of Police, AWPS Neelankarai Police Station, and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): Mr.N.Iyyakannu For Respondent(s): Mr. LEONARD ARUL JOSEPH SELVAM ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for R1 Page2 of 8