Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 54043 (MAD)

Akil @ Akilan v. State Rep. by, Inspector of Police

CRL OP/9894/2026 · 2026-07-20

D Bharatha Chakravarthy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP No. 9894 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 9894 of 2026 Akil @ Akilan S/o.Annadurai, No.463, 1st Main 3rd Cross Munisubba Reddy, Layout, Hongasandra, Bangalore - 560068. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. State Rep. by, Inspector of Police, Bargur Police Station, Krishnagiri District. Crime No.383 of 2025 2. Nadeem S/o.Noor Mohamed, No.83, Jagadevi Village, Brgrur Tk, Krishnagiri. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., /528 of BNSS, to call for the records relating to Crime No.383 of 2025 on the file of respondent, compromise and quash the same and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): M/s.T.Balaji For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Mohamed Riyax Government Counsel (Crl. Side) for R1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9894 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash Crime No.383 of 2025 on the file of the 1st respondent Police for alleged offences under Sections 303(2), 311 & 351(3) of BNS, on the ground of compromise between the parties. 2. The brief facts leading to the instant case is that the all the accused are said to have followed the complainant and snatched away money at knife point from the car and also further extracted money from the de facto complainant. Hence, the case was registered for the offences under Sections 303(2), 311 & 351(3) of BNS as such, it can be seen that the allegations are serious in nature. The petitioner is also said to have twelve cases. It is contended that in the CCTV, the petitioner is not found but however, the same is disputed by the prosecutor by submitting that the CCTV footage is not clear and only after expert evidence, it will come to light whether the present petitioner is present or not. 3. For all the above reasons, this compromise quash cannot be entertained and if the petitioner is aggrieved, for the same relief on merits, it will be open for him to file a fresh quash application. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9894 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 4. This Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the above observations. 20-07-2026 Neutral Citation: Yes/No KKN To 1.The Inspector of Police, Bargur Police Station, Krishnagiri District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9894 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. KKN CRL OP No. 9894 of 2026 20-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis