Allowed¶31

Ravisankar v. Home, Prohibition and Excise Department

Madras HC10 Jul 2026CRL OP/17968/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal case on compromise; Section 528 BNSS / Section 482 Cr.P.C. extraordinary jurisdiction; non-compoundable offences under IPC Sections 294(b), 324, 506(2); reliance on Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Madras High Court; Judicial Magistrate Thiruvottiyur; C.C.No.201 of 2026 quashed; petition allowed; parties stood by compromise.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of C.C.No.201 of 2026 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottiyur. ¶31

Ravisankar Vs Home, Prohibition and Excise Department — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CRL OP No. 17968 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

CRL OP No. 17968 of 2026

¶7

Ravisankar

¶8

Narasimalu @ Lella Narasimalu

¶9

Anburajan @ Anbu

¶10

..Petitioner(s)

¶11

¶12

State rep by The Sub Inspector of Police, M-8, Sathangadu Police Station, Redhills.

¶13

Karthick @ Dhayanandharaj

¶14

..Respondent(s)

¶15

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records in C.C.No.201 of 2026 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate at Thiruvottiyur and quash the same.

¶16

For Petitioner(s): Mr.G.B.Motcham For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran Government Advocate (Criminal Side) For R1

¶17

Page1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

CRL OP No. 17968 of 2026

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash C.C.No.201 of 2026 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottiyur for alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(2) of IPC, on the ground of compromise between the parties. The parties are present before the court and, on examination, stand by their compromise and do not want the case to proceed further.

¶22

The broad contours of the High Court's power to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 528 of the BNSS in respect of compromise of non-compoundable offences are laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Gian Singh -Vs- State of Punjab and Another (2012 10 SCC 303) and other subsequent judgments.

¶23

The gist of facts leading to the instant case is that there was a funeral procession in respect of a person’s death. At that time, when near the place of the defacto complainant, there was an incident where the defacto complainant is said to have questioned all the accused. The accused are said to have abused the defacto complainant, attacked him and threatened him.

¶24

__________ Page2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

CRL OP No. 17968 of 2026

¶27

The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the parties have

¶28

ironed out their differences.

¶29

Thus, it can be seen that this matter is a fit case for the exercise of

¶30

extraordinary jurisdiction to quash the case on compromise.

¶31

Accordingly, this Crl.O.P. No.17968 of 2026 stands allowed. The C.C.No.201 of 2026 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottiyur stands quashed.

¶32

10-07-2026

¶33

Neutral Citation: Yes/No jas

¶34

¶35