BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.01.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and Crl.M.P(MD) No.12296 of 2025 Rahini ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Inspector of Police, Jeeyapuram Police Station, Jeeyapuram, Trichy District.

Crime No.7 of 2025.

2.Vijayendran ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records pertaining to the FIR in Crime No.7 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent Police and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Silambarasan For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

For R2 : No appearance

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed challenging the FIR in Crime No.7 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent Police, as against the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an Executive Officer of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR & CE) Department. The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent, who is the Village President of Allur Village, had carried out certain maintenance works without obtaining prior permission from the petitioner. In this regard, it is alleged that the petitioner threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences and also pulled his shirt. Based on the said allegations, a complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant and Crime No.7 of 2025 came to be registered for the offences punishable under Sections

296(b) and 351(ii) of the BNS.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the FIR registered against the petitioner is a foisted one and seeks the indulgence of this Court to quash the same.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that the matter is a case and counter-case. It is submitted that the petitioner has also lodged a complaint against the defacto complainant and the same was registered in Crime No.6 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 132 and 351(2) of the BNS and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. It is further submitted that both the cases are at a very nascent stage and the investigation has not yet been concluded.

5. This Court has heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and carefully perused the materials available on record. A perusal of the FIR in Crime No.7 of 2025 reveals that the presence of the petitioner at the time of the alleged occurrence has not been clearly mentioned. It is the considered opinion o this Court that the ingredients of the offence under Section 296(b) of the BNS are not prima facie made out.

6. The learned Government Advocate, on instructions, submitted that the issue had arisen out of a dispute with regard to construction activities carried out beyond the authorised temple area, pursuant to which complaints have been lodged by both parties, resulting in registration of a case and counter-case.

7. In view of the above, the first respondent Police is directed to expedite the investigation in both the cases, identify the real aggressor, and file the final report by strictly following PSO 566 and the guidelines issued by the Full Bench of this Court in T.Balaji and another Vs. State, reported in 2014 (5) CTC 1, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

02.01.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Indu To

1.The Inspector of Police, Jeeyapuram Police Station, Jeeyapuram, Trichy District.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

Indu

02.01.2026