BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 12/02/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI and CRL MP(MD). No.13280 of 2025

1. Velmurugan, 2. Saroja, 3. Selvaraj, 4. Selvarani ... Petitioners Vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep, . by the Inspector of Police,, All Women Police Station, Manapparai Police Station, Trichy District.

2. Revathi ... Respondents PRAYER :-

To call for the records pertaining to the impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.132 of 2025 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr. B.Jameelarasu, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh for R1 Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to call for the records pertaining to the impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.132 of 2025 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai and quash the same.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are the accused numbers 1 to 4 in the pending case in C.C.No.132 of 2025 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai. The first petitioner is the husband of the de facto complainant / the second respondent. The second petitioner is the mother-in-law of the second respondent / defacto complainant. The third and fourth petitioners are the brother and sister of the first petitioner. The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent /defecto complainant has had given a criminal complaint against the petitioners before the first respondent police, alleging that the marriage between the first petitioner and the second respondent was solemnized on 14/6/2015 as per the Hindu rites and customs. At the time of marriage, the first petitioner was given with 10 sovereigns of gold jewels and sreedhana articles worth about Rs. 3,28,000/- and their matrimonial life commenced in the shared matrimonial home belonging to the first, second and third petitioners and it was a joint family. It is further alleged that all the petitioners 1 to 4 had harassed her and caused mental agony and cruelty and driven her out of the shared matrimonial home and thereafter she had filed a maintenance case before the judicial Magistrate. Pursuant to the same, the petitioners have together proceeded to the de facto complainant's matrimonial home and harassed her and criminally intimidated her with dire consequences and compelled her to withdraw the maintenance case, for which he had given a criminal complaint and Crime No.4 of 2022 was registered for the offenses under Section 498A, 294-B, 506(i) of IPC as against the Petitioners herein and the same culminated in laying charge sheet as against the petitioners.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner categorically contended that except matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the de facto complainant, the petitioners have never ever subjected her to any cruelty. Already twice a compromise was entered into between the parties. However, the compromise could not be acted upon. It is a completely foisted case which has been given by the second respondent only with the sole intention of extracting money.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that earlier in a petition filed by the second respondent before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai, under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Acts, the petitioners have arrived at a compromise between the defecto complainant and an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was obtained by the 2nd respondent from the petitioners at the instance of the learned Judicial Magistrate. As per the agreed terms, the first petitioner had agreed to arrange a separate residence for the safe living of the petitioner which was not acted upon, as a result of which the terms of compromise agreement was frustrated and hence the defacto complainant did not withdraw the complaint as agreed.

5. Learned Government Advocate submitted that at the instance of this Court, the parties were sent for mediation before the Mediation Center and t