The High Court may quash non-compoundable criminal proceedings under Section 528 BNSS (Section 482 CrPC) if the dispute is purely individual/personal in nature and has been amicably settled, provided there is no overriding public interest involved.

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., to call for the records pertaining to the final report filed in Special S.C.No.117/2025 pending trial on the file of the learned Fast Track Mahila Court at Krishnagiri, quash the same .

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.117 of 2025 pending on the file of the learned Fast Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the de facto complainant/second respondent.

2. Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant/R2, a case in Crime No.34 of 2025 was registered on the file of the first respondent Police against the petitioner, for the offences under Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and Section 115(2) of BNS. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed and taken cognizance of, as aforesaid.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and the de facto complainant are close relatives and that, owing to a misunderstanding among family members, the present case came to be registered. He further submitted that although the petitioner had pulled the hands of the de facto complainant, the said act was neither accompanied by any sexual intent nor motivated by any illicit purpose, but occurred in the course of a family dispute. He further contended that acting on erroneous legal advice, the de facto complainant had lodged an exaggerated complaint and subsequently, upon realising that the petitioner harboured no mala fide intention, the de facto complainant agreed to compromise the matter. On the advice of elders, the parties have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves and thereofre, seek quashment of the proceedings pending against the petitioner. Affidavits and a Joint Compromise Memo to the said effect have also been filed before the is Court.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent submitted that initially, a case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and Section 115(2) of BNS. After completion of investigation, the first respondent filed the final report for the offences punishable under Sections 11(1) and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act . He also submitted that although the parties have entered into a compromise during the pendency of the case, this Court, having regard to the gravity and seriousness of the alleged offences, is required to examine whether offences of such nature can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the parties.

5. The learned counsel for the second respondent / de facto complainant submitted that the petitioner and the de facto complainant are close relatives and that the complaint arose out of a family dispute. He further submitted that pursuant to the intervention of elders, the parties have amicably settled the matter and resolved their differences.

6. The petitioner and the de facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and were identified by their respective counsel as well as by Mr.V.Neelamegam, SSI, All Women Police Station, Denkanikottai, Krishnagiri District.

7. On being enquired by this Court, the de facto complainant stated that she has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioner and she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings and therefore, seeks to quash the same.

8. The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable o