CRL OP No. 16832 of 2026 _________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 16832 of 2026 1. S.Senthilkumar S/o.Singaram, No.68/1,Ponnusamy Nagar, Perumalai Road, Vathittapuram, Thittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 2. Rajamohan S/o.Sokkalingam, No.72/9, Ponnusamy Nagar, Thittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 3. Vengateswari W/o.Senthilkumar, No.68/1,Ponnusamy Nagar, Perumalai Road, Vathittapuram, Thittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore District. 4. Vijayakumari W/o.Singaram, No.68/1,Ponnusamy Nagar, Perumalai Road, Vathittapuram, Thittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thittakudi Range, Cuddalore District. Crime no.215 of 2025. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16832 of 2026 _________ Page2 of 6 2. The Inspector of Police Thittakudi Police Station, Thittakudi, Cuddalore District. Crime no.215 of 2025. 3. Velmurugan S/o.Ramasamy, Arunthathiyar Street, Kodikalam, Puthunatham, Thittakudi Taluk, Cuddalore District. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to call for the records relating to the case in Crime No.215 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the 1st Respondent and Quash the same. For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.G.Senthil Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for R1 & R2 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to call for the records relating to Crime No.215 of 2025, pending investigation on the file of the first respondent, and to quash the same. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, The third respondent has also signed the Joint Memo of Compromise. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16832 of 2026 _________ Page3 of 6 3. Upon considering the gist of the allegations contained in the FIR, it is seen that the de facto complainant, while carrying out work claiming ownership over the land in question, was allegedly attacked and also abused by uttering his caste name. The entire occurrence appears to have arisen out of rival claims relating to the ownership of the land. 4. It is brought to the notice of this Court that, upon reference to mediation, the parties have amicably settled their disputes relating to the ownership of the land. A Memorandum of Compromise dated 22.01.2026 was entered into between the parties and was also recorded before the concerned Court. Pursuant thereto, the present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the FIR. The de facto complainant has joined the petitioner in executing the Joint Memo of Compromise, and affidavits sworn by the parties have also been filed before the concerned Court. 5. Though the offences alleged include provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, this Court cannot mechanically act upon the compromise memo alone and is required to examine the facts and circumstances of the case. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16832 of 2026 _________ Page4 of 6 6. Upon such examination, it is evident that the dispute originated from rival claims regarding the ownership of the land. The allegation is that the de facto complainant, who was engaged in connection with the property in dispute was assaulted and that his caste name was also uttered during the incident. The materials placed before this Court indicate that the alleged utterance of the caste name was incidental to the property dispute and that the occurrence did not arise on account of any caste-based animosity. 7. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the nature of the dispute as well as the subsequent settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case for the exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, within the four corners of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh -Vs State of Punjab & another, case. 8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition No.16832 of 2026 shall stands allowed and the FIR in Crime No. 215 of 2026 on the file of the first respondent is hereby quashed. 02-07-2026 Neutral Citation: Yes/No av https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16832 of 2026 _________ Page5 of 6 To 1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Thittakudi Range, Cuddalore District. 2. The Inspector of Police Thittakudi Police Station, Thittakudi, Cuddalore District. 3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 16832 of 2026 _________ Page6 of 6 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. av CRL OP No. 16832 of 2026 02-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis