Allowed¶28

Krishnaveni v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC16 Mar 2026CRL OP(MD)/12067/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.12067 of 2025; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; R.VIJAYAKUMAR J.; decided 16.03.2026; quash of charge sheet; Section 528 BNSS Act, 2023; C.C.No.1095 of 2024; Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi; Cr.No.13 of 2024; Sendhamaram Police Station, Tenkasi District; petitioner Krishnaveni, first accused; compromise between parties pending trial; de-facto complainant consent dated 11.03.2026; charge sheet quashed against all three accused; petition allowed.

What did the court decide?

Charge sheet in C.C.No.1095 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi, quashed as against all the three accused; Criminal Original Petition allowed. ¶28

Krishnaveni Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.12067 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.03.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.12067 of 2025

Krishnaveni

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Inspector of Police, Sendhamaram Police Station, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District. (in Cr.No.13 of 2024)

¶11

2.M.Jeya 3.V.Kanagaraj 4.Mohammed Asarudeen

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

(The respondents 3 and 4 were impleaded vide order of this Court in Crl.M.P.(MD)No.5986 of 2026, dated 16.03.2026)

¶14

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act, 2023, to call for the records relating to the proceedings in C.C.No. 1095 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Tenkasi and quash the same.

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.12067 of 2025

¶18

For Petitioner	:Mr.N.Dilip Kumar
For R1	:Mr.A.Albert James
	Government Advocate (crl.side)
For R2	:Mr.C.Murugavel
	*****

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The present petition has been filed by the first accused in C.C.No. 1095 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi, seeking to quash the charge sheet.

¶21

2.Pending trial, the parties have entered into a compromise, wherein, the de-facto complainant is agreed for quashing the charge sheet against the petitioners. The de-facto complainant was present in person

¶22

before this Court on 11.03.2026 and submitted that she had entered into a compromise and she has no objection for quashing the charge sheet as against all the three accused.

¶23