K.Steffy @ Manikkammal Steffy v. The State Rep.By,

ORDER The petitioners, who are the accused in Crime No.76 of 2025 dated 01.02.2025 for offences under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 76, 79 and 351(3) of the B.N.S, 2023 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 on the file of the first respondent Police, have filed this Criminal Original Petition on the ground of compromise.

¶2The case of the petitioners is that on 22.10.2024, at 9.00 P.M, when the second respondent's father was sitting outside their house, the petitioners came there, abused him in filthy language. When the second respondent questioned the same, the petitioners started abusing the second respondent also in filthy language and physically assaulted her. With the assistance of the neighbours, the second respondent was admitted in the Government Stanley Hospital, Chennai on 22.10.2024 at around 11.00 P.M. The first respondent Police took complaint from the second respondent. On the complaint of the second respondent, the first respondent Police registered F.I.R in Crime No.76 of 2025 for offences under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 76, 79 and 351(3) of the B.N.S, 2023 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 against the petitioners.

¶3The case is at the stage of investigation. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

¶4Today, the petitioners and the second respondent appeared before this Court and their identity is confirmed by Mr.M.Muthuraj, Sub-Inspector attached to the first respondent Police Station. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. The second respondent informed that due to misunderstanding and difference of opinion, the occurrence has happened and the dispute was purely personal in nature and now they are not willing to further proceed with the case and filed an affidavit to that effect. The petitioners and the second respondent have filed separate affidavit before this Court.

¶5Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the First Information Report 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 Supreme Court in The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar and Another reported in

(2019) 2 MLJ Crl 10, this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is inclined to quash the F.I.R.

¶6This Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the F.I.R in Crime No.76 of 2025 dated 01.02.2025 on the file of the first respondent Police is quashed against the petitioners.

12.06.2026 Index : yes/no Speaking order/Non-speaking order : yes/no grs To

¶1The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶2The Inspector of Police, N2-Kasimedu Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. grs

12.06.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 12.06.2026 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR 1. K.Steffy @ Manikkammal Steffy 2. I.Clement @ I.Kanikkairaj Clement 3. K.Williams 4. Prema @ Alphonse Prema 5. Charlton @ W.Charlton Christ .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State, rep by Inspector of Police, N2-Kasimedu Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai. 2. M.Irudhayamary @ Sofia .. Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for records pertaining to the F.I.R in Crime No.76 of 2025 on the file of N1-Kasimedu Police Station, Chennai and quash the same. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Magimai Raj For Respondents : Mr.A.Amarnath, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side), for R1 : Mr.K.Ariprakash, for R2