CRL OP No. 5100 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 5100 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.No. 3816 of 2026 1. Santhakumar S/o.Balasubramani, 2. Saravanakumar S/o.Balasubramani, Both petitioners are residing at No.143, Aghragara Street, Jayamangalam, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Inspector of Police, Crime Branch (CID), Nagapaattinam. (Crime No.02 of 2024) 2. S.Balaji S/o.Selvaraj, Nehru Street, Manakudi, Mayiladuthurai. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records relating to the case in C.C.No.295 of 2025 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayiladuthurai and quash the same as far as the petitioners are concerned. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 5100 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 For Petitioner(s): Mr. A.Jayaramachandran For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran Government Counsel (Crl. Side) ORDER The prayer in the Criminal Original Petition is to quash the final report and proceedings in C.C.No.295 of 2025 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayiladuthurai and to quash the same on compromise. 2. The de facto complainant is present before the Court and he would submit that he has ironed out the issue with the petitioners and has no objection for the case being quashed on compromise. Irrespective of the affairs that is complained in the final report, the broad contours of excise of powers to quash the case on compromise has been defined by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in Gian Singh -Vs- State of Punjab and Another (2012 10 SCC 303). 3. With the principles in background, if the facts of this case is adverted to, the allegation is with reference to the petitioners running manpower agency whereby, people are sent to Cambodia. It is a known case that in Cambodia all these persons were used only to make further illegal acts, such as, threatening the hapless victims by way of digital arrest etc., and this offence is connected to the grave situation that is prevailing in the country with reference to draining of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 5100 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 thousands of crores of Indian money overseas, by way of digital scams and arrests. Therefore, considering the social impact and the economic impact involved, even though the case is projected as one of compromise, this is not a fit case where the Court can quash the case by compromise. 4. At this juncture, the learned counsel argued on merits. It is the case of the learned counsel for the petitioners that Accused No. 2 and 3 did not even receive any monetary benefits from their bank transaction. It can be seen that the entire agency was run only by A1 and they had even transferred all the amounts to A1. The argument is factual in nature. It has to be established only during the course of the trial and the said statements cannot be taken as incontrovertible and this Court cannot quash the proceedings at this stage. 5. Therefore, keeping open the liberty of the petitioners to raise all the grounds during the course of the trial, the Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions is closed. The observation made above are all with reference to dealing of the compromise quash petition and the Trial Court will go as per the evidence that is on record and decide the issue. 14-07-2026 Neutral Citation: No KKN https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 5100 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. KKN To 1. The Inspector of Police, Crime Branch (CID), Nagapaattinam. 2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayiladuthurai. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. CRL OP No. 5100 of 2026 14-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis