IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

1. Rajarao

2. Vengoprao

3. Ramanathroa

4. Vijay

5. Punithkumar

6. Karthik 7. Savitha

8. Manjeswari

9. Chandrappa Konanahalli ..Petitioners Vs

1. The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Velankanni Police Station, Nagapattinam.

Crime No.432 of 2025.

2. D.Ragul ..Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to call for the records in Crime No.432 of 2025 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.V.Karnan For Respondents: Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

for R1 Mr.V.Bharathidasan for R2

ORDER

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.432 of 2025, pending against the petitioners, on the file of the first respondent Police, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioners and the de facto complainant/second respondent.

2. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

3. Based on the complaint given by the de facto complainant/R2, the aforesaid case in Crime No.432 of 2025 was registered on the file of the first respondent Police against the petitioners, for the offences under Sections

191(2), 137(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 109 and 351(3) of BNS.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as for the de facto complainant submitted that one Keerthana, daughter of 1^st and 7^th petitioners, without informing them, married the de facto complainant/second respondent at Velankanni on 10.12.2025. On coming to know about the said marriage, the petitioners assaulted the de facto complainant/second respondent, his parents and the said Keerthana and now, the petitioners 1 and 7 have accepted the marriage of their daughter, Keerthana with the de facto complainant. The learned counsel further submitted that the parties have now amicably settled the issue among themselves. Hence, they seek to quash the First Information Report as against the petitioners. Affidavits and Joint Memo of Compromise to that effect have also been filed.

5. The petitioners and the de facto complainant/R2 appeared before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsel as well as by Mr.V.Ramath, HC 412, Velankanni Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

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

7. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing on behalf of the first respondent submitted that the petitioners have come all the way from Bangalore to Velankanni and assaulted the de facto complainant, his parents and his wife, Keerthana. However, the investigation in this case has been completed and the final report has been filed in PRC No. 4 of 2026 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Keevalur. He further submitted that though the parties have entered into a compromise while this case is pending, this Court, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, has to consider the issue as to whether offences of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.

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 offences pending against the petitioners. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641, has given sufficient guidelines that must be taken into consideration by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 528 BNSS), to quash non- compoundable offences. One very important test that has been laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine if the crime in question is purely i