Quashed¶20

Si of Police Deevattipatti v. Selvakarthi

Madras HC2 Sept 2025SUO MOTU TR/213/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compromise-based quashing of criminal case under Section 482 CrPC relying on Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Madras High Court Dedicated Bench, hybrid hearings; affidavit/terms-of-compromise dispensation; offences under Ss.294(b), 323 IPC and S.4 TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act 2002; Suo Motu transfer; Omalur/Salem; counsel: Addl. Public Prosecutor S. Sugendran; directions to trial court on classification and property disposal.

What did the court decide?

C.C.No. 136 of 2021 (Judicial Magistrate, Omalur Taluk, Salem) quashed on compromise under Section 482 CrPC, following Gian Singh; Suo Motu TR.No.213 of 2025 disposed of; Trial Court directed to take note of the electronically communicated order, classify the case, consider applications such as disposal of properties, and dispatch copies to all concerned. ¶20

Si of Police Deevattipatti Vs Selvakarthi — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the pending case in C.C.No. 136 of 2021 (arising from Cr.No.666 of 2018, for alleged offences under Sections 294(b) and 323 IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002) should be quashed in exercise of Section 482 CrPC jurisdiction on the basis of the compromise between the parties, as per Gian Singh. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

Considering the factual matrix, the context in which the conflict arose, the background of the parties and their present position, this is an appropriate case for exercise of Section 482 CrPC jurisdiction, as per Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Owing to the unique manner in which the designated bench conducts hybrid hearings, the filing of written affidavits or terms of compromise is dispensed with.

¶19

Key takeaways

The case in C.C.No. 136 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Omalur Taluk, Salem stands quashed and the Suo Motu Transfer Case stands disposed of.ratio¶20
Directions to the Trial Court: take note of this digitally signed order communicated electronically, classify the case as allowed/dismissed/disposed of etc., consider incidental applications (such as disposal of properties), pass appropriate orders as necessary, and dispatch copies of the order to all concerned.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.), Suo Motu TR.No.213 of 2025 (02.09.2025), arising from C.C.No. 136 of 2021, Judicial Magistrate, Omalur Taluk, Salem (Cr.No.666 of 2018, Deevattipatti Police Station), registered for alleged offences under Sections 294(b) and 323 IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. Handled by the Dedicated Bench pursuant to Suo Motu.W.P.(Crl.) No.618 of 2025. As both parties had moved on and consented to disposal on compromise, and given the hybrid-hearing mode of the bench, written affidavits/terms of compromise were dispensed with; invoking Section 482 CrPC as per Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Court quashed C.C.No. 136 of 2021 and disposed of the transfer case. Trial Court directed to take note of the digitally signed/electronically communicated order, classify the case, consider incidental applications (including disposal of properties) and dispatch copies.

¶1

Suo Motu TR.No. 213 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02.09.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

Suo Motu TR.No.213 of 2025

¶7

(C.C.No. 136 of 2021 of Judicial Magistrate, Omalur Taluk, Salem)

¶8

The State rep.by The Sub Inspector of Police, Deevattipatti Police Station, Salem. ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Selvakarthi ... Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor

¶12

O RDER

¶13

This Suo Motu Case is dealt with in an extraordinary manner by the Dedicated Bench, pursuant to Suo Motu.W.P.(Crl.) No.618 of 2025.

¶14

This case, Cr.No.666 of 2018 is registered for alleged offences under

¶15

Section 294(b), 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. The parties have moved on and have no objection to the case being disposed of on compromise. Due to the unique manner in which this designated bench conducts hybrid hearings, the

¶16

1/3

¶17

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

¶18

Suo Motu TR.No. 213 of 2025

¶19

filing of written affidavits or terms of compromise is dispensed with. Considering the factual matrix, the context in which the conflict arose, the background of the parties, and their present position, this is an appropriate case for the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as per Gian Singh -Vs State of Punjab & another, (2012 10 SCC 303).

¶20

Accordingly, the case in C.C.No. 136 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Omalur Taluk, Salem shall stands quashed and this Suo Motu Transfer Case stands disposed of.

¶21

02.09.2025

¶22

nsl

¶23

Note to the Trial Court: This order is digitally signed and communicated electronically alone. The Trial Court shall take note of the order and accordingly classify the case pending before them as allowed / dismissed / disposed of, etc, and while doing so, consider any applications such as disposal of properties, etc., and pass appropriate orders, as may be necessary. Further, the Court below is directed to dispatch the copy of this order to all concerned.

¶24

2/3

¶25

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

¶26

Suo Motu TR.No. 213 of 2025

¶27

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

¶28

nsl

¶29

Suo Motu TR.No.213 of 2025