- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 12 June 2026
- Bench
- M. Nirmal Kumar
- Case no.
- CRL OP 14375/2026
Judgment
ORDER The petitioner / accused facing trial in S.C.No.40 of 2025 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tirupattur for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 307 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code, has filed this quash petition.
¶2The contention of the petitioner is that both the petitioner and the second respondent are working as daily wagers (Mesthri) and due to a quarrel relating to their daily work, the petitioner went to the second respondent's house and picked up quarrel with him and scolded him in filthy language and pushed the second respondent from the upstairs, thereby, the second respondent sustained injuries and hence, the F.I.R was registered. The petitioner further contends that both the petitioner and the second respondent have come to amicable settlement and prayed for quashing this petition.
¶3The learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Crl. Side) for the first respondent submitted that based on the complaint given by the second respondent, FIR in Crime No.27 of 2024 has been registered and investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed in S.C.No.40 of 2025 before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tirupattur, for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 307 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submitted that now the case is at the stage of pending trial. In the meantime, both the petitioner and the second respondent arrived at a compromise and settled the issues between them.
¶4Considering the submissions made by the parties and on perusal of entire materials, it is seen that the case is pending trial. At this stage and also by passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and decided to compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.
¶5Today, the petitioners and the second respondent are present before this Court and their identity is confirmed by the first respondent Police. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. The petitioners and the second respondent have filed a joint compromise memo to that effect duly signed by both of them.
¶6Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping C.C.No.920 of 2025 pending, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature. In the light of the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 - (Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath), and after exercising due caution as advised by the Hon'ble Suprme Court in The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjarth and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10, this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashes C.C.No.920 of 2025 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruvallur.
¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and consequently, S.C.No.40 of 2025 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tirupattur, is quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
12.06.2026 Index : yes/no Speaking order/Non-speaking order : yes/no grs To
¶1The District and Sessions Judge, Tirupattur.
¶2The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
¶3The Inspector of Police, Ambur Taluk Police Station, Tirupattur District.
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. grs and Crl.M.P.Nos.9225 and 9226 of 2026
12.06.2026
Case details
Parties and counsel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 12.06.2026 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR and Crl.M.P.Nos.9225 and 9226 of 2026 Suryaprasath .. Petitioner Versus 1. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Ambur Taluk Police Station, Tirupattur District. (Cr.No.27/2024) 2. Murugan .. Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the entire records in connection with S.C.No.40 of 2025 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Tirupattur and quash the same on the ground of compromise. For Petitioner : Ms.S.Rithika For Respondents : Mr.A.Amarnath, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side), for R1
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.