Allowed¶43

Ajay v. State rep by Inspector of Police

Madras HC20 Jul 2026CRL OP/19250/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compromise quash of FIR; inherent/extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and Section 528 BNSS; non-compoundable offences settled between parties; offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), 329(3), 324(2) BNS and Section 4 TNPHW Act; Crime No. 194 of 2026, P1-Pulianthope Police Station, Chennai; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 relied on; parties confirmed compromise in open court; High Court of Madras; single-judge bench, Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy; decision date 20-07-2026; CRL OP No. 19250 of 2026; petition allowed, FIR quashed; no neutral citation.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of Crime No. 194 of 2026 pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, P1-Pulianthope Police Station, Chennai. ¶43

Ajay Vs State rep by Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CRL OP No. 19250 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 20-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

CRL OP No. 19250 of 2026

¶7

Ajay S/o. Nagaraj, 398, M.Block, S.V.M. Nagar, Perambur, Barracks, Chennai-600 012.

¶8

Suresh

¶9

S/o. Palani, 30,Nehru Nagar, 3rd Street, Puliyan Thoppu, Perambur, Barracks, Chennai-600 012.

¶10

Ajith Kumar

¶11

S/o. Janakiraman, 57, Janakiraman, 57, Pogi Palyam, Pattalam, Perambur, Barracks, Chennai-600 012.

¶12

Kishore Kumar

¶13

S/o. Iyyanar, No.306, 3^rd Street, Elephantgate, Sowcarpet, Chennai-600001.

¶14

V.Manoj

¶15

S/o. Venkatesan, No.81, Corporation Small line, Bogipalayam, Pattalam, Perambur Barracks, Chennai-600 012.

¶16

Sanjay S/o. Palani, 3, Sivarao Road, Pattalam, Perambur, Barracks, Chennai-600012.

¶17

__________ Page1 of 6

¶18

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

¶19

CRL OP No. 19250 of 2026

¶20

Jayaprakash S/o. Janakiraman, 57, Pogipalyam, Pattalam, Perambur, Barracks, Chennai-600 012.

¶21

..Petitioner(s)

¶22

¶23

State rep by Inspector of Police P1- Pulianthope Police Station, Chennai District. Crime No. 194 of 2026

¶24

Manikandan S/o. Mayandi, No.16, Masque Street, Pattalam, Pulianthope, Chennai-600 012.

¶25

..Respondent(s)

¶26

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., r/w. 528 of BNSS, to call for the records relating to Crime No.194 of 2026 on the file of respondent and compromise quash the same and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render Justice.

¶27

For Petitioner(s): Mr.T.Balaji For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran Government Counsel (Crl. Side) for R1

¶28

ORDER

¶29

This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash Crime No.194 of 2026 on

¶30

the file of the 1^st respondent Police for alleged offences under Sections 191(2),

¶31

Page2 of 6

¶32

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

¶33

CRL OP No. 19250 of 2026

¶34

191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), 329(3), 324(2) of BNS and Section 4 of TNPHW Act, 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.

¶35

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.

¶36

The brief facts leading to case is that the accused are said to have occupying the road and were also having liquor and, upon being confronted by the de facto of complainant, they threatened and also attacked the de facto complainant. After a few minutes time, they also followed the de facto complainant to his home and entered his home and thereafter, they attacked him again. It is stated that the parties have ironed out the issue.

¶37