Madras High Court
Radha Gandhi vs The State Of Tamil Nadu Through on 11 November, 2024
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19283 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.11.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19283 of 2024
Radha Gandhi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu through
The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Tenkasi District.
(Crime No.4 of 2018)
2.R.Susithra ... Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
2023, to call for the impugned proceedings of the charge sheet in
C.C.No.487 of 2018, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court,
Tenkasi, and quash the same as illegal insofar as the petitioner is
concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Thomas Raja Durai
For R1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi
Government Advocate
(Criminal Side)
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19283 of 2024
For R2 : Ms.B.Suvathi
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, invoking Section
528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking orders to call
for the records in C.C.No.487 of 2018, on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate Court, Tenkasi, and quash the same as against the petitioner.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was employed
as a Teacher at a Government School in Manalkattanur and married the
second respondent seven years ago. A female child was born of their
marriage. However, the petitioner began an illicit relationship with
another woman named, Rajeswari, who was arrayed as A2 and failed to
support the second respondent and their child. On 04.03.2018, at around
10:30 a.m., when the second respondent confronted the petitioner about
this, he verbally abused her in filthy language, took the child from her,
and threatened her with dire consequences. He then left with the child
and informed the second respondent that he had married Rajeswari/A2
and was living with her in Valparai. As a result, the second respondent
lodged a complaint.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19283 of 2024
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that the second respondent has lodged a complaint before the first
respondent and on that basis, F.I.R came to be registered in Crime No.4
of 2018 and after investigation and filing of the final report, the same
was taken cognizance in C.C.No.487 of 2018, on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Tenkasi, for the offences under Sections 294(b), 498-A, 494
and 506(ii) I.P.C. against the petitioner.
4. The case is under trial. By passage of time, the parties have
decided to bury their hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably
among themselves.
5. A Joint Memo of Compromise has been filed before this Court
which have been signed by the petitioner and the second respondent and
also by their respective counsels. The petitioner and the second
respondent are present before this Court and and they were identified by
Ms.S.Vasanthi, Special Sub-Inspector of Police, All Women Police
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19283 of 2024
Station, Tenkasi, as well as by the learned counsels appearing for the
parties. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that
the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.
6. In the instant case, the dispute is of personal in nature and the
parties had compromised. Where the parties have compromised the
matter, the High Court has to power to quash the complaint for the
offence under Sections 294(b), 498-A, 494 and 506(ii) I.P.C.
7. The legal position expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012)
10 SCC 303 and Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat)
reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 were taken into consideration.
8. In the light of the guidelines issued in the above said judgments
of the Hon'ble Apex Court, no useful purpose will be served in keeping
the proceedings in C.C.No.487 of 2018 as against the petitioner pending
before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Tenkasi, even though, the offences
involved are not compoundable in nature.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19283 of 2024
9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the
proceedings in C.C.No.487 of 2018, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate
Court, Tenkasi, is quashed as against the petitioner and the joint
compromise memo shall form part and parcel of this order.
NCC : Yes / No 11.11.2024
Index : Yes / No
smn2
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate,
Tenkasi.
2.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Tenkasi District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19283 of 2024
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
smn2
Order made in
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19283 of 2024
Dated: 11.11.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
