CRL.OP.No.18296 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 14-07-2026 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL.OP.No.18296 of 2026 and CRL.MP.No.12183 of 2026 Kannan ..Petitioner Vs. 1. State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Pallipalayam Police Station, Namakkal District. 2. Lakshmi ..Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, praying to call for records relating to Crime No.225 of 2026 on the file of 1st respondent Police and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioner For Petitioner: Mrs.L.Meenakshi For Respondents: Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, (for R1) Government Advocate (Crl. Side) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP.No.18296 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 6 ORDER This criminal original petition has been filed challenging the FIR in Crime No.225 of 2026 and to quash the same. 2. The prayer sought in this petition is innocuous in nature, and as such, this petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself, without ordering notice to the second respondent. 3. A perusal of the FIR reveals that following the tragic demise of the son of the second respondent/de facto complainant, who committed suicide by hanging, a complaint was lodged naming several individuals as being responsible for his death. The individuals named therein are allegedly the creditors of the deceased. Based on the said complaint, a case for abetment of suicide has been registered against all the named individuals. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a lawful money lender who has acted strictly within the legal framework. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP.No.18296 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 6 He further submitted that the petitioner did not commit any act or instigation that could be construed as a proximate cause for the deceased to take the extreme step of committing suicide. 5. This Court has carefully considered the factual matrix. A bare perusal of the FIR indicates that clear allegations have been levelled against multiple persons, including the petitioner. The contention raised by the petitioner that his actions lack the requisite legal proximity to the alleged offence, is a factual defence that can be considered during the course of the investigation. 6. Once the allegations disclose a cognizable offence, the respondent police cannot be expected to adjudicate upon the veracity of the claims at the threshold stage of registration. At this nascent stage, it is premature for this Court to evaluate the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and to quash the FIR. 7. Consequently, this Court finds no merit in entertaining the prayer to quash the FIR. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to agitate all https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP.No.18296 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 6 his legal defences before the appropriate forum at the appropriate stage. 8. With the above observations and liberty, this criminal original petition stands disposed of. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 14-07-2026 Neutral Citation: No Sni https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP.No.18296 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 6 To 1.The Inspector of Police, Pallipalayam Police Station, Namakkal District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.OP.No.18296 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 6 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J. Sni CRL.OP.No.18296 of 2026 14-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis