Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 216613 (MAD)

D. Premkumar v. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

CRL OP(MD)/7865/2025 · 2025-10-08

Sunder Mohan

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP(MD). No.7865 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 08.10.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP(MD). No.7865 of 2025 1.D.Premkumar 2.G.Muthulakshmi 3.D.Renuka ... Petitioners/A1 to A3 Vs 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police,, AWPS-Sattur, Virudhunagar District. (Crime No.9 of 2023). 2.C.Nandhini ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records relating to the first Information Report in Crime No.9 of 2023, dated 16.05.2023, on the file of the first respondent Police, and quash the same in the interest of justice. For Petitioners : Mr.M.Divyanathan For R1 : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : Mr.M.Sivasankar ORDER This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking to quash the first Information Report in Crime No.9 of 2023 on the file of the first respondent Police, which was registered for the offences under Section 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.7865 of 2025 498-A of IPC, Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. 2. The allegation in the FIR is that the first petitioner is the husband and the second and third petitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant; that they jointly committed cruelty on account of dowry demand and thus, committed the aforesaid offences. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the defacto complainant/the second respondent would submit that the parties have now entered into a compromise. In fact, the marriage between the first petitioner and the second respondent/defacto complainant has been declared as null and void by the II Additional Family Court, Chennai, vide order dated 18.05.2024 and both the parties have agreed that the impugned F.I.R may be quashed. 4.The parties have also filed a joint compromise memo. The scanned copy of the compromise memo reads as follows: 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.7865 of 2025 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.7865 of 2025 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.7865 of 2025 5.The petitioners, namely, D.Premkumar (Aadhaar No.7130 3173 1823), G.Muthulakshmi (Aadhaar No.5277 6826 0609), D.Renuka (Aadhaar No.4322 1053 8872) and the second respondent, namely, C.Nandhini (Aadhaar No.8666 9368 3298) are present before this Court in person. They are identified by Mrs.P.M.Mareeswari, WHC, AWPS, Sattur. All the parties confirmed the compromise arrived at between them. 6.Considering the nature of the offences and the fact that the parties have arrived at a compromise, this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned FIR pending investigation. Accordingly, the impugned FIR in Crime No.9 of 2023, on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed and the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. 08.10.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No vsg 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.7865 of 2025 To 1.The Inspector of Police,, AWPS-Sattur, Virudhunagar District. 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.7865 of 2025 SUNDER MOHAN,J vsg ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7865 of 2025 Date : 08.10.2025 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis