Madras High Court
Surendiran vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 23 January, 2025
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 23.01.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
and Crl.M.P(MD).No.4447 of 2024
Crl.O.P(MD).No.531 of 2025
1.Surendiran
2.Fathima Beevi ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.STate of Tamil nadu,
The Inspector of Police,
Jeeyapuram Police Station,
Trichy District.
Crime No.518 of 2021
2.S.Velusamy
3.Saranya ... Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
2023, to call for the records relating to charge sheet in P.R.C.No.197 of
2023 on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Trichy
and quash the same as against the petitioiners.
For Petitioners : Mr.T.J.Ebenezer Charles
For R1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi
Government Advocate
(Criminal Side)
For R2 & R3 : Mr.Vishnuvarthanan
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
Crl.O.P(MD).No.5900 of 2024
Raja @ Dhamodharan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.State rep., by
The Inspector of Police,
Jeeyapuram Police Station,
Trichy District.
Crime No.518 of 2021
2.S.Velusamy ... Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
2023, to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet taken on file
by the learned Additional Mahila Judge, Trichirappalli in P.R.C.No.197
of 2023 and quash the same as illegal and void.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathiroy
Senior Counsel for
Mr.C.Karthikeyan
For R1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi
Government Advocate
(Criminal Side)
For R2 : Mr.Vishnuvarthanan
COMMON ORDER
These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed, invoking
Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking orders
to call for the records in P.R.C.No.197 of 2023 on the file of Judicial
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Trichy, and quash the same as
illegal, improper and abuse of process of law.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto
complainant/Velusamy's daughter and Surendran got married and they
were blessed with two children. Thereafter, the said Surendran/A1 had
illegal intimacy with one Fathima Beevi/A2. On supporting the same,
one Raja @ Dhamodharan and others had given asylum to them. The
defacto complainant's daughter warned Surendran, but the said
Surendran assaulted the defacto complainant' daughter. While so, on
14.01.2021, the said Surendran with intend to murder the defacto
complainant's daughter hanged her on the ceiling fan and the defacto
complainant has suspicion that one Raja @ Dhamodharan was also
present at the occurrence place. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit
that the second respondent lodged a complaint before the first respondent
and F.I.R. registered in Crime No.518 of 2021, after investigation, final
report filed, the same taken cognizance in P.R.C.No.197 of 2023, on the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court,
Tiruchirappalli for the offences under Sections 307, 498(A), 203, 109
and 34 of IPC and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women
Act, 2002 against the petitioners.
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. Now, both realized their mistakes, reconciled and
second respondent agreeing to withdraw the complaint, not willing to
pursue the case.
5. A Joint Memo of Compromise filed before this Court signed by
the petitioners, second respondent, victim and their respective counsels.
The petitioners and the second respondent present before this Court and
compromise has been confirmed by the second respondent and
respondent police, as well as by the learned counsels appearing for the
parties. This Court enquired both the parties, satisfied that the parties
have come to an amicable settlement between themselves on their own
voluntarily without any compulsion.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
6. In the instant case, where the parties have compromised the
matter, the High Court has to power to quash the complaint for the
offence under Sections 307, 498(A), 203, 109 and 34 of IPC and Section
4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.
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 P.R.C.No.197 of 2023 as against the petitioners
pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court,
Tiruchirappalli, even though, the offences involved are not
compoundable in nature.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
9. Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed and
the proceedings in P.R.C.No.197 of 2023 pending on the file of the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli, is
quashed as against the petitioners and the joint compromise memo shall
form part and parcel of this order. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
NCC : Yes / No 23.01.2025
Index : Yes / No (1/2)
Rmk
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court,
Tiruchirappalli.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Jeeyapuram Police Station,
Trichy District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
Rmk
Order made in
Crl.O.P.(MD)Nos.531 of 2025 and 5900 of 2024
Dated: 23.01.2025
(1/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
