S.GOVINDARAJU v. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police,
CRL OP/29940/2025 · 2026-07-20
D Bharatha Chakravarthy
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8833 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8833 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CRL OP No. 29940 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 29940 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No. 20415 of 2025 S.Govindaraju, S/o.Subramani, Door No.1/26, Thirubalahalli Village, Gendiganahalli Post, Karimangalam Taluk, Dharmapuri District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri. Cr.No.19/2024. 2. Chithra D/o.Chinnasami, Samisettipatti Village, Nallampalli Taluk, Dharmapuri. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records in SC No.68/2025 on the file of the Honble Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, quash the same. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Avinash Wadhwani For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran Government Counsel (Crl. Side) for R1 Mr.C.Iyyapparaj for R2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 29940 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 6 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash SC.No.68 of 2025 on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri for alleged offences under Sections 506(2), 313 & 376C of IPC, 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. 2. 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. 3. The gist of allegations is that the de facto complainant who joined as a paralegal in the Office of the accused, who is an Advocate originally alleged that by pressurising her, they entered into a relationship and pursuant thereto, there was also physical relationship. Though it is alleged by the prosecutrix that it is only the accused who himself has prepared a divorce petition for her, from the statement of the other witnesses, it is seen that the said Chitra had divorced her husband. Under the said circumstances, now the de facto complainant / prosecutrix submits that she doesn't want to pursue the matter further and that she is living alone along with her son. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 29940 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 6
4.
Considering the statements made by the de facto complainant before this Court and though the allegations originally made are serious in nature that the employer sexually harassing the employee and taking advantage of his position and having intercourse, in view of the subsequent statements made by the de facto complainant and that now she is living in peace with her child and that in her own best interest, she doesn't want to pursue the complaint further, I am of the view that on overall perusal of the records of the case, it can be seen that the parties entering into some kind of extramarital relationship on voluntary basis and the complaint arisen, thereafter. Further, since the de facto complainant is also does not want to proceed with the case further, no meaningful outcome in the trial can also be expected. 5. For all the above reasons, even though the allegations in this case are serious in nature, I am of the view that in this case this Court can exercise the jurisdiction power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the case on compromise. 6. In view thereof, the Crl.O.P.No.29940 of 2025 stands allowed. The affidavits filed by the parties pursuant to the compromise are taken on record. The proceedings in S.C.No.68 of 2025 on the on the file of the Hon’ble Fast https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 29940 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 6 Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri shall stand quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 20-07-2026 Neutral Citation: No KKN https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 29940 of 2025 __________ Page5 of 6 To
1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri. 2. The Fast Track Mahila Court, Dharmapuri. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 29940 of 2025 __________ Page6 of 6 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. KKN CRL OP No. 29940 of 2025 20-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis