Allowed¶29

Harihara Sudhan v. State by Inspector of Police.

Madras HC17 Jul 2026CRL OP/19081/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, D. Bharatha Chakravarthy J., CRL OP No. 19081 of 2026, decided 17-07-2026 — quashing of FIR in Crime No.31 of 2026 (N-4 Fishing Harbour Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai) on compromise between parties; alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 296(2) and 115(2) of BNS; petition under Section 528 BNSS invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C. inherent-power framework per Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; petitioners Harihara Sudhan, Saravanan, Diwakar A; second respondent Disingu; FIR quashed, petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the FIR in Crime No.31 of 2026 on the file of the first respondent (N-4, Fishing Harbour Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai 600 013). ¶29

Harihara Sudhan Vs State by Inspector of Police. — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the FIR in Crime No.31 of 2026 on the file of the first respondent (N-4, Fishing Harbour Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai 600 013).

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in Crime No.31 of 2026, alleging offences under Sections 126(2), 296(2) and 115(2) of BNS, can be quashed on the ground of compromise between the parties under Section 528 of BNSS.

¶21

Court's answer

The parties were present before the Court and, on examination, stood by their compromise and did not want the case to proceed further.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

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 those laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh -Vs- State of Punjab and Another (2012 10 SCC 303) and other subsequent judgments.

¶22

Key takeaways

Since the parties have ironed out their differences, this matter is a fit case for the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction to quash the case on compromise.ratio¶24
CRL OP No. 19081 of 2026 stands allowed.ratio¶28
The FIR in Crime No.31 of 2026 on the file of the first respondent stands quashed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Original Petition under Section 528 of BNSS seeking quashing of FIR in Crime No.31 of 2026 (N-4 Fishing Harbour Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai) for alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 296(2) and 115(2) of BNS on the ground of compromise — parties present before the Court and, on examination, stood by their compromise and did not want the case to proceed — background: on account of enmity the accused waylaid the de facto complainant, abused him in filthy language and attacked him, causing bleeding injuries to his mouth and lips; differences since ironed out — relying on the contours laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, held this a fit case for exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction — CRL OP No. 19081 of 2026 allowed and FIR quashed (D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J., 17-07-2026).

¶1

CRL OP No. 19081 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

CRL OP No. 19081 of 2026

¶7

Harihara Sudhan

¶8

Saravanan

¶9

Diwakar A

¶10

..Petitioner(s)

¶11

¶12

State by Inspector of Police, The Inspector of Police , N-4, Fishing Harbour Police Station, Royapuram, Chennai 600 013. Crime No. 31 of 2026.

¶13

Disingu

¶14

..Respondent(s)

¶15

Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, praying to call for the record pertaining to FIR in Cr.No.31 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police by way of compromise and to quash the same, and pass such further or other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render Justice.

¶16

For Petitioner(s): Mr.J.B.Solomon Peter Kamal Doss For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, Government Advocate (Crl. Side), for R1 M/s.M.A.Praveena, for R2

¶17

Page1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

CRL OP No. 19081 of 2026

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash the FIR in Crime No.31 of 2026 on the file of the first respondent for alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 296(2) and 115(2) of BNS, 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 background facts in which this case arises is that on account of enmity, the accused have way laid the de facto complainant and abused him in filthy language and also attacked with their hands and the de facto complainant suffered bleeding injuries in his mouth and lips. The parties have now ironed out their differences between them.

¶24