Tthalamuthu @ T. Thalamuthukumar Vs the State Represented by, the Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Tthalamuthu @ T. Thalamuthukumar Vs the State Represented by, the Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

FIR in Crime No.136 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent quashed; terms of the Joint Compromise Memo made part and parcel of the order; petitioners to pay Rs.5,000/- jointly as costs to the Chief Justice Relief Fund, Madras High Court, Tamil Nadu, and file a photocopy of the receipt with a compliance memo in the Registry; connected miscellaneous petition (Crl.M.P.No.3761 of 2025) closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in Crime No.136 of 2024, registered under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 191(2) & 351(2) of BNS against the petitioners, should be quashed in view of the amicable settlement between the parties, notwithstanding that the offences involved are not compoundable.

Court's answer

Where the parties have settled the dispute amicably through a Joint Compromise Memo, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the First Information Report pending, even though the offences involved are not compoundable in nature.

Ratio / Principle

Guided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court's guidelines in Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath (2017 9 SCC 641), this Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, quashed the FIR in Crime No.136 of 2024 pending investigation on the file of the first respondent.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J., 21.04.2025) allowed Crl.O.P.No.5804 of 2025 and quashed the FIR in Crime No.136 of 2024 of D-6 Anna Square Police Station, Chennai, registered against four petitioners for offences under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 191(2) & 351(2) of BNS. Pending the petition the parties buried their differences and executed a Joint Compromise Memo signed by the petitioners, the defacto complainant and their counsel; the Court enquired both parties and satisfied itself of the amicable settlement. Holding that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the FIR pending although the offences were not compoundable, and in light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's guidelines in Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath (2017 9 SCC 641), the Court exercised its jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 and quashed the FIR pending investigation. The terms of the Joint Compromise Memo form part and parcel of the order; the petitioners were directed to pay Rs.5,000/- jointly as costs to the Chief Justice Relief Fund, Madras High Court, and file the receipt with a compliance memo; the connected Crl.M.P.No.3761 of 2025 was closed.

Crl.O.P.No.5804 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.04.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Crl.O.P.No.5804 of 2025

and Crl.M.P.No.3761 of 2025

Thalamuthu @ T.Thalamuthukumar

S.Hemanath

Goutham @ K.Goutham Rajan

S.Armstrong

... Petitioners

Vs.

The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, D-6 Anna Square Police Station, Chennai District, Crime No.136 of 2024.

M.Vasanthakumar

... Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for the records culminating Cr.No.136 of 2024 pending on the file of the D-6 Anna Square Police Station, Chennai District, quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.Sanjay N Gandhi For Respondents For R1 : Mr. R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.G.V.Sridharan

Page 1 of 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.5804 of 2025

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the

FIR in Crime No.136 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent, registered for the offences under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 191(2) & 351(2) of BNS, as against the petitioners.

Pending this petition, the parties have decided to bury their

hatchet and compromise the dispute amicably among themselves.

A Joint Compromise Memo has been filed before this Court,

which has been signed by the petitioners and the defacto complainant and also by their respective counsel. All the parties are present and identified by their respective counsel and the Police. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.

Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the First Information Report pending, even though, the offences involved are not compoundable in nature. In the light of the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2017 9 SCC Page 2 of 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.5804 of 2025

641-(Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath), this

Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, quashes the FIR in Crime No.136 of 2024 p ending investigation on the file of the first respondent.

5 . In view of the above, the FIR in Crime No.136 of 2024 on

the file of the first respondent, is hereby quashed. The terms of Joint Compromise Memo shall form part and parcel of this Order. The petitioners shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/-, (Rupees five Thousand only) jointly as costs, to the Chief Justice Relief Fund, Madras High Court, Tamil Nadu, forthwith and file a photocopy of the receipt along with a memo reporting compliance in the Registry.

6 . Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

21.04.2025 (½)

Index : Yes/No Neutral citation : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order

rts

Page 3 of 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.5804 of 2025

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

rts

To

1 . The Inspector of Police, D-6 Anna Square Police Station, Chennai District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

Crl.O.P.No.5804 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.3761 of 2025

21.04.2025 (½)

Page 4 of 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis