CRL OP No. 17526 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 17526 of 2026 1. Irwin Pathuvai Francis 2. Antony Louis Xavier 3. Suganthi Singara Selvi 4. Arun Pathuvai Francis ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State Rep by its, The Inspector of Police W-18, All Women Police Station, M.K.B Nagar, Chennai - 600 039. 2. M.Sanmathi Fathima ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records in C.C.No.12 of 2026 on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Egmore, Chennai and Quash the same and pass such further order or other orders as deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. For Petitioner(s): Mr.J.Kingsly Solomon For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17526 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash C.C.No.12 of 2026 on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Egmore, Chennai for alleged offences under Sections 417 r/w 34, 506 (i) of IPC & 4 of TNPHW Act, 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 the facts leading to the instant case are that the prosecutrix and the first accused are related to each other. It is stated that on the promise of marriage, they were moved closely. Pursuant to which, there was also physical relationship. Subsequently, there was not proposal for marriage and therefore, having felt cheated, a complaint was made and as such it was registered. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17526 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 4. The de facto complainant now submits that the parties have moved on and she does not want to pursue the matter further. She would further plead that in her own best interest, the case be closed. 5. I have considered the aspects that there was no any force that is involved and even considering the statements made during the proceedings, it seems to be a long standing consensual relationship between the parties. Thus, it can be seen that this matter is a fit case for the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction to quash the case on compromise. 6. Accordingly, this Crl.O.P. No.17526 of 2026 stands allowed. Consequently, the proceedings in C.C.No.12 of 2026 on the file of Additional Mahila Court, Egmore, Chennai stands quashed. 08-07-2026 Neutral Citation: No PVS To 1. The Additional Mahila Court, Egmore, Chennai 2. The Inspector of Police W-18, All Women Police Station, M.K.B Nagar, Chennai - 600 039. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17526 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. PVS CRL OP No. 17526 of 2026 08-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis