[Cites 14, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Riyash Mohamed vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 27 February, 2026

                                                                                         CRL OP(MD). No.8265 of 2025


                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                    Dated : 27/02/2026

                                                           CORAM

                             THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI

                                            CRL OP(MD). No.8265 of 2025

                     Riyash Mohamed                                                         ... Petitioner

                                                                Vs

                     1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
                     Rep. by Its, the Inspector of Police,
                     Thallakulam Police Station,
                     Madurai District.
                     Crime No.858 of 2024.

                     2. Irulraj                                                          ... Respondents

                     PRAYER :-
                           To call for the entire records in relating to the PRC.No.430 of 2024 by
                     the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.II,Madurai and quash the same.

                       For Petitioner     : Mr. Muthusaravanan.P,
                                            Advocate.

                       For Respondent : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar for R1
                                        Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

                                            SMr.J.Vivek for R2




                     1/8




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2026 05:14:53 pm )
                                                                                              CRL OP(MD). No.8265 of 2025


                                                                ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 CrPC /

Section 528 BNSS, seeking to quash the charge sheet in PRC.No.430 of

2024 by the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.II,Madurai, insofar as the

petitioner is concerned.

2. The gist of the allegations in the final report is that the accused

persons scolded the defacto complainant in filthy language and attacked

him in connection with a love affair between two others. Pursuant to the

complaint given by the defacto complainant / second respondent, a case

in Crime No.858 of 2024 was registered on the file of the first respondent

against the petitioner and others for the offences under Sections 191(2),

191(3), 296(b), 333, 115(2), 118(1), 109, 351(3), 3(5), 49 of BNS, 2023

and the same culminated in laying final report in Sessions PRC No. 430

of 2024 before the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai,

for the same offences. Seeking quashment of the charge sheet, this

Criminal Original Petition is filed.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2026 05:14:53 pm )

3. Admittedly, the petitioner and the second respondent are

residing in the same locality, and they have now resolved the dispute

amicably. A Joint Compromise Memo dated 27.02.2026 has been filed

before this Court.

4. The petitioner and the second respondent / defacto

complainant are present before this Court in person and are identified by

Ms.A.Jeyalakshmi, WSSI, D1 Tallakulam Police Station, Madurai

District. The defacto complainant has categorically stated that he does

not wish to pursue the proceedings against the petitioner herein. This

Court is satisfied that the compromise is voluntary and not the result of

any coercion or undue influence.

5. The law relating to quashment of criminal proceedings on

the basis of compromise between the parties is well settled. In Gian

Singh v. State of Punjab1, the Hon’ble Supreme Court authoritatively

held that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC is

of wide amplitude and may be exercised to quash criminal proceedings

1 2012 (10) SCC 303

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2026 05:14:53 pm )

even in respect of non-compoundable offences, provided the dispute is

essentially private in nature and the quashment would secure the ends of

justice. The Court, however, drew a clear distinction between offences

arising out of personal or matrimonial disputes, commercial transactions

and similar private wrongs, and serious or heinous offences having grave

impact on society, holding that the latter category cannot ordinarily be

quashed merely on the basis of a settlement.

6. The said principles were succinctly crystallised in

Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat 2, wherein the Supreme Court, after

surveying the earlier precedents, laid down broad propositions governing

the exercise of inherent jurisdiction on the basis of compromise. It was

emphasised that the paramount consideration is whether the continuance

of the criminal proceedings would be unfair or contrary to the interests of

justice, and whether the dispute predominantly bears a civil or private

character, rendering the possibility of conviction remote and bleak.

7. In State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan3, the

Supreme Court reiterated and clarified the limitations on such power,

2 2017 (9) SCC 641 3 2019 (5) SCC 688

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2026 05:14:53 pm )

holding that offences of a serious nature, particularly those involving

mental depravity, grave violence, or offences against society at large,

cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise, even if the parties have

amicably settled the dispute. The Court further cautioned that while

examining compromise quash petitions, the High Court must consider the

nature and gravity of the offence, the conduct of the accused, and the

stage of the proceedings, and the overall impact on society and must

satisfy itself that the settlement is voluntary and not the result of coercion

or undue influence.

8. Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present

case, this Court has carefully examined the nature and gravity of the

allegations, the relationship between the parties, the conduct of the

petitioner, the stage of the proceedings, and the voluntary nature of the

compromise.

9. The dispute in question is predominantly private in character

and does not involve any offence having serious or grave impact on

society at large. In view of the compromise arrived at between the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2026 05:14:53 pm )

parties, the possibility of conviction is rendered remote and bleak.

Continuation of the criminal proceedings would therefore serve no useful

purpose and would amount to an abuse of the process of Court.

10. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Lovely Salhotra and

another v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another4, has held that where a

clear offence is made out against the prime accused and no offence is

made out against the peripheral accused, the Court can certainly consider

quashing the charges against those accused, against whom no offence is

made out.

11. Accordingly, the impugned PRC No. 430 of 2024 before the

file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Madurai, is quashed insofar

as the petitioner is concerned and the Criminal Original Petition stands

allowed. Each petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Thousand only)for establishing an E-Library to the credit of the

MBHAA, in Indian Bank, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Branch,

Account No.496038755 IFSC No.IDIB000H040, MICR Code:

4 AIR 2017 SC 2595

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2026 05:14:53 pm )

625019020, on or before 23.03.2026. The joint compromise memo dated

27.02.2026 shall form part and parcel of this order.

12. The petitioners are directed to file a memo along with the

photocopy of the receipt before the Registry on or before 23.03.2026.

List the matter on 24.03.2026, for reporting compliance.

27.02.2026 NCC : yes / no Index : yes / no Internet : yes / no

pnn

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Thallakulam Police Station, Madurai District. Crime No.858 of 2024.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/03/2026 05:14:53 pm )

L. VICTORIA GOWRI, J

pnn

ORDER IN