CRL OP No. 17268 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 17268 of 2026 AND CRL MP NO. 11503 OF 2026 1. Abi Vinayak M S/o. Maneksha Both are Residing at. No.69/20, Sivalingam Street, Vetri Nagar, Jawahar Nagar, Chennai-600082. 2. Maneksha Murugan @ Meneksha Shanumugavel S/o. Murugan, Both are residing at. No.69/20, Sivalingam Street, Vetri Nagar, Jawahar Nagar, Chennai-600082. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. State rep by The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, W-38, Puzhal. In Crime No.18 of 2026. 2. Sangeetha W/o.Suresh G. No.2C, Seethapathy 1st Street, Corporation Office, Madhavarm, Tiruvallur-600060. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, praying to call for the records culminated in the impugned FIR in Crime No.18 of 2026 dated 30.05.2026 on the file of the1st respondent police and quash the same. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17268 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 For Petitioner(s): Mr/M.L.Ramesh For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Crl.Side) Order 1. This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash the FIR in Crime No.18 of 2026, on the file of the first respondent police, for alleged offences under Sections 64(2)(m), 75(2), 77, 308, 351(3) of BNS, under Sections 66E, 67 of Information Technology Act and under Section 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 facts leading to the instant case is that the defacto complainant, in her complaint, states that one of the accused, being the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17268 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 father of the person with whom she was allegedly in a relationship demanded a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-, threatening to release her intimate videos along with the other accused. When the matter came up for hearing, the defacto complainant submitted that she had received the amount, including a further sum of Rs.5,00,000/- making a total of Rs.10,00,000/- and that she is now leading an amicable life and does not want to pursue the complaint. Though the threat of releasing the videos has societal implications, considering the predicament of the defatco complainant and the unique and peculiar features of this case, I am of the view that the case should be treated as private in nature. 4. Thus, it can be seen that this matter is a fit case for the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction to quash the case on compromise. 5. Accordingly, this Crl.O.P. No.17268 of 2026 stands allowed. The FIR in Crime No.18 of 2026, on the file of the first respondent police stands quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 06-07-2026 Neutral Citation: No AH https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17268 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 To 1.The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, W-38, Puzhal. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 17268 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY J. AH CRL OP No. 17268 of 2026 AND CRL MP NO. 11503 OF 2026 06-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis