CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-03-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR CRL OP No.24632 of 2025 and CRL.M.P.No.16817 of 2025 D.Sudhakar, S/o.Desingu, No.8/92, Nagalamman Kovil Street, Semancheri, Kovalam, Chengalpattu District. Petitioner/Accused Vs 1.State represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, Law & Order, N-2, Kasimedu Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.237/2025) 2.Kalaimathi, W/o.Sudhakar, No.8, 11th Street, Vinayagapuram, Tondairpet, Chennai – 600 081. Respondents PRAYER: The Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, praying to call for the records relating to the Crime No.237 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent/police and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Velmurugan 1/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 For Respondent-1: Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Additional Public Prosecutor Assisted by Ms.Harshana, T For Respondent-2 : Mr.M.Sathish Kumar ORDER The Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.237 of 2025, on the file of the first respondent police as against the petitioner, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the de facto complainant/second respondent. 2. The gist of the prosecution case is that on 09.05.2025, the respondent police received a complaint from the second respondent/de facto complainant. Initially, CSR No.51 of 2025 assigned and thereafter on 26.05.2025 F.I.R. registered in Crime No.237 of 2025 for offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS, 2023. The second respondent/de facto complainant was married with the petitioner 18 years before and out of the marriage they had twin girls and one son. Due to the misunderstanding between the petitioner and the de facto complainant they were living separately for the past four years and the victim is staying along with her mother. On 02.05.2025 at about 6.15 a.m. the petitioner came and knocked the 2/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 door of the de facto complainant’s house, forcibly entered the house and using abusive words pulled the de facto complainant’s hand and also assaulted her on her chest and strangulated her, kicked her all over the body. Further, threatened to withdraw the maintenance case, which she filed against him. Two men and one lady were along with him at the time of assault. Since the de facto complainant fainted, she was rushed to the hospital and given first aid. Thereafter she took treatment as inpatient till 03.05.2025 and after taking rest, she lodged the complaint. 3.The contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner was assaulted by the de facto complainant and her family members. The petitioner got injured and he took treatment in Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital. The petitioner produced the medical records and also lodged complaint but the first respondent police deliberately violated the guidelines under 588-A of the Police Standing Orders. He further submitted that it is the petitioner who lodged a complaint at the first instance. On coming to know about the same, the de facto complainant, his divorced wife created a story and lodged a false complaint. The petitioner filed a divorce petition in H.M.O.P.No.116 of 2013 and the learned Principal Sub Judge, Chengalpattu dissolved the marriage between the petitioner and the de facto complainant on 06.01.2014. Ten years thereafter, the de facto complainant filed divorce petition 3/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 on the ground of cruelty, desertion in H.M.O.P.No.3688 of 2024 before the learned V Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai and the same was dismissed as infructuous on 13.12.2024. Further, a maintenance petition was filed in M.C.No.19 of 2025 on the file of V Additional Family Court by the de facto complainant for herself and her children. This would clearly show how the de facto complainant has been filing false cases against the petitioner. The respondent police without verifying the past records of the de facto complainant mechanically registered the F.I.R. The petitioner in support of his contention produced the judgment and decree copy in H.M.O.P.No.116 of 2013 filed by him and H.M.O.P.No.3688 of 2024 filed by the second respondent/de facto complainant and petition copy in M.C.No.19 of 2025 and the Accident Register copy dated 02.04.2025 to show the alleged assault by the de facto complainant and her relatives. He further submitted that during the pendency of the above quash petition, this Court referred the matter for mediation on 23.09.2025. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that during the pendency of the above case, the matter was referred to mediation. During mediation, the issue resolved between the petitioner and the de facto complainant and it was agreed that petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- in two installments, i.e., Rs.7,50,000/- in each installment. The same was now paid and the de facto complainant gave no objection for quashing of the F.I.R. in 4/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 Crime No.237 of 2025 and also disposing of the maintenance case in M.C.No.19 of 2025. 5.Today, the petitioner and the de facto complainant/second respondent are present before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsel. Both parties confirmed their participation in the Mediation Centre and during mediation, the issue deliberated and resolved. Both parties came to an understanding and as per the understanding, the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- paid by way of Demand Drafts. The second respondent/de facto complainant also acknowledged receipt of the same. A scanned reproduction of the demand drafts read as follows: 5/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 6/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 6.They also produced the settlement agreement entered in the Mediation Centre, which reads as follows: 7/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 8/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 9/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 10/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 11/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 12/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 13/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 7. The second respondent/de facto complainant also filed an affidavit confirming the compromise entered between them. 8. In view of the above, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the First Information Report in Crime No.237 of 2025, pending on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed and the petitioner. The petitioner is discharged of all charges. 9. The affidavit and the Settlement Agreement dated 20.01.2026 filed by the petitioner and the second respondent for compromising the offences shall form part of the records. Consequently, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 27-03-2026 Index : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order Neutral citation : Yes/No rsi 14/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 To 1. The Sub Inspector of Police, Law & Order, N-2, Kasimedu Police Station, Chennai. 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. 15/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 24632 of 2025 M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. rsi CRL OP No.24632 of 2025 and CRL.M.P.No.16817 of 2025 27.03.2026 16/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis