BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 23.01.2026 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

1.Akash @ Akash Kumar

2.Ananth

3.Bala @ Balamurugan

4.P.Arun ... Petitioners/Accused No.1to 3 & 5 Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, O/o. the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ponnamaravathi Sub Division, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District.

2. State of Tamilnadu Rep by The Inspector of Police, Namana Samuthiram Police Station, Pudukottai District. ... 1^st Respondent/Complainant (In Crime No. 120 of 2024)

3. Jei Kumar ... 2^nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant

2. Manikumar ... 3^rd Respondent/ Victim PRAYER : Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 to call for the records of impugned Charge Sheet in Spl.S.C. No. 58 of 2024 on the file of the learned Special Court for Trial of SC and ST (POA) Act Cases, Pudukottai and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioners.

For Petitioners : Mr. A.Abdulkabur For Respondents : Mr. M.Sakthi Kumar (R1)

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

Mr. P.Prabakaran (R2)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 CrPC / Section

528 BNSS, seeking to quash the charge sheet in Spl.SC.No.58 of 2024 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of SC and ST (POA) Act Cases, Pudukottai, insofar as the petitioners are concerned.

2. The gist of the allegations in the final report is that, the accused persons abused the defacto complainant and the victim in filthy language also by using caste related words, attacked them with stone and also criminally intimidated them. Pursuant to the complaint given by the defacto complainant / second respondent, a case in Crime No.120 of 2024 was registered on the file of the second respondent against the petitioners and others for the offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 115(2) & 351(3) of BNS, 2023 & Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities ) Act, 1989, and the same culminated in laying final report in Spl.SC.No.58 of 2024 before the file of the Special Court for Trial of SC and ST (POA) Act Cases, Pudukottai, for the offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 118(1), 115(2), 351(3) & 296(b) of BNS, 2023 & Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities ) Act, 1989. Seeking quashment of the charge sheet, this Criminal Original Petition is filed.

3. Admittedly, the petitioners, the second respondent and the third respondent are known to each other, and they have now resolved the dispute amicably. A Joint Compromise Memo dated 05.12.2025 has been filed before this Court.

4. The petitioners and the second respondent / defacto complainant and the third respondent / victim are present before this Court in person and are identified by the Police Official of Namana Samudram Police Station, Pudukkottai District. The defacto complainant and the victim have categorically stated that they do not wish to pursue the proceedings against the petitioners herein. This Court is satisfied that the compromise is voluntary and not the result of any coercion or undue influence.

5. The law relating to quashment of criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise between the parties is well settled. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab¹, the Hon’ble Supreme Court authoritatively held that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC is of wide amplitude and may be exercised to quash criminal proceedings even in respect of non- compoundable offences, provided the dispute is essentially private in nature and the quashment would secure the ends of justice. The Court, however, drew a clear distinction between offences arising out of personal or matrimonial disputes, commercial transactions and similar private wrongs, and serious or heinous offences having grave impact on society, holding that the latter category cannot ordinarily be quashed merely on the basis of a settlement. 6. The said principles were succinctly crystallised in Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Guja