IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR CRL O.P. No. 9213 of 2026 Jonathan ..Petitioner Vs

1. The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Perumbakkam Police Station, Pallikaranai, Chennai.

(Cr.No.235 of 2025)

2. Vignesh ..Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records relating to the case in C.C.No.14 of 2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.2, at Alanthur, Compromise and Quash the same.

For Petitioner: Mr. T. Jeyam For Respondent: Mr. R. Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1

O R D E R

The petitioner who is an accused in C.C. No. 14 of 2026 facing trial for offences under Sections 296(b) and 118(1) of the BNS before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Alandhur, has filed this Criminal Original Petition.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant was working as an electrician and doing plumbing work in an apartment. While so, on 23.06.2025 at about 4.00 a.m., the petitioner, in a drunken state, abused him in filthy language and slapped him on his face, thereby preventing him from doing his work. Further, the petitioner also made derogatory comments in a WhatsApp group named “Owner’s Group”. On the complaint given by the 2^nd respondent, the 1^st respondent Police registered an FIR in Crime No.235 of 2025 for offence under Sections 296(b) and 115(2) of the BNS. On completion of the investigation, the 1^st respondent Police filed a charge sheet before the trial Court, listing 9 witnesses and the relevant documents.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the 1^st respondent.

4. The case is at the stage of trial. By passage of time, the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

5. Today the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent appeared before this Court and their identities were confirmed by Mr. M. Kandeepan, SSI, attached to the 1^st respondent Police Station. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. The petitioner and the 2^nd respondent have filed separate affidavits before this Court and have also filed a Joint Compromise Memo, which is extracted hereunder:

“The Petitioner/Accused and 2nd Respondent/De-Facto complainant most humbly states as follows:-

1. The Petitioner/Accused and the 2nd Respondent/De-facto complainant submits that the 2nd Respondent had lodged the complaint before the Respondent police which culminated into FIR in Crime No. 235 of 2025 for the Offence under Section 296(b), 115(2) of BNSS Act, 2023 on 23.06.2025. After Investigation, the Respondent Police had filed the Chargesheet and the same was numbered as C.C. No. 14 of 2026 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. II, Alandhur. Now the Entire issue came to be settled by the way of Compromise Deed/Affidavit dated 27.03.2026 entered into between the Petitioner and 2nd Respondent. Since, the case is of the Questioning stage and pending before the Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Alandhur. The Entire Issue between the Parties is Non-Compoundable in nature and it is difficult to close the allegations against the Petitioners under section 359 of BNSS Act, 2023. Hence, the Present petition came to be filed for Quashing the FIR and the 2nd Respondent has already given his consent by way of supporting affidavit which is filed along with the typed set of papers which may be treated as part and parcel of this Joint Memo of compromise.

2. The Petitioner/Accused and the 2^nd Respondent/De-facto complainant states as the Petitioner had rendered an unconditional apology to the 2nd Respondent and thereby they want to amicably settle the issue and the 2nd Respondent don't want to proceed the criminal case pending against the Petitioner.

3. The Petitioner and 2nd Respondent state that the 2nd Respondent is willing to withdraw the complaint and also don't wan