CRL OP No. 18468 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 18468 of 2026 Mageshwaran S/o Sivakumar, No.46, 4th street, Barathi Nagar, Korukkupet, Chennai-600 021. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. State rep by the Inspector of police Dr.R.K.Nagar Police Station, Chennai-600021. Crime No.403 / 2029 2. Bhuvan S/o Doss, No.53/47, 5th Barathi Nagar, Korukkupet, Chennai-600021. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records in FIR No.403 of 2019 on the file of the Inspector of Police, H-6, Dr.R.K,Nagar Police Station, Korukkupet, Chennai-600021, and quash the same. For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Syed Azharudeen For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran Government Counsel (Crl. Side) for R1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18468 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash FIR No. 403 of 2019 on the file of the 1st respondent / Inspector of Police, H-6, Dr.R.K,Nagar Police Station, Korukkupet, Chennai-600021 for alleged offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 394, 397 & 506(2) 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 case is registered under Section 397 IPC, normally this Court will not entertain any plea for compromise quash. The plea is made only with reference to the petitioner who arrayed as A9. His name was not originally in the FIR. The case is of the year 2019. The petitioner and the de facto complainant are said to be relatives. The de faco complainant himself would submit that the petitioner was not even present in the said spot. Even though seven years have passed by, charge sheet is also not filed. It is submitted that there is absolutely no allegation of snatching any money or wielding the knife, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18468 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 as far as the present petitioner is concerned. Considering all the above and since the de facto complainant and the accused have ironed out the differences, I am of the view that the FIR can be quashed only in as much as the petitioner is concerned. . 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.18468 of 2026 stands allowed. The FIR No. 403 of 2019 on the file of the 1st respondent / Inspector of Police, H-6, Dr.R.K,Nagar Police Station, Korukkupet, Chennai-600021 stands quashed with reference to the petitioner alone. 15-07-2026 Neutral Citation: No KKN https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18468 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. KKN To 1. The Inspector of police Dr.R.K.Nagar Police Station, Chennai-600021. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. CRL OP No. 18468 of 2026 15-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis