Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 54490 (MAD)

Rebala Sridhar@ Sridhar Rebala v. The State rep by the Inspector of Police

CRL OP/18690/2026 · 2026-07-22

D Bharatha Chakravarthy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP No. 18690 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL OP No. 18690 of 2026 Rebala Sridhar@ Sridhar Rebala S/o.Rebala Raju, No.7-105, Pullareddypalem, Tangutur Mandalam, Alakurapadu, Tangutur, Andra Pradesh - 523 274,. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State rep by the Inspector of Police Cyber Crime -II, Tiruppur City. Crime no.25 of 2022. 2. Gopinath S/o.Thangavel, No.7/87-1, Metu Street, Pachal Post, Kadendapatti, Nagapattinam District - 637 018. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Sec.528 of B.N.S.S. 2023, praying to call for the records pertaining to final report in C.C.No.601 of 2024 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tiruppur and Quash the same as compromise. For Petitioner(s): Mr. J.Sadam Hussain For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) For R1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18690 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 ORDER 1. This Criminal Original Petition seeks to quash the final report in C.C.No.601 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tiruppur for alleged offences under Sections 66 D of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 420, 471, 170 and 466 of I.P.C. 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 are that forcing himself to be an employee of a particular concern, the order was made and money to the tune of ₹4,33,810 was taken away and misappropriated. It is submitted that the amount has been repaid on the next day itself and the parties have subsequently ironed out their issue. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18690 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 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.18690 of 2026 stands allowed. The final report in C.C.No. 601 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tiruppur stands quashed. 22-07-2026 Neutral Citation: Yes/No RPP To 1. Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tiruppur. 2. The Inspector of Police Cyber Crime -II, Tiruppur City. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18690 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY J. RPP CRL OP No. 18690 of 2026 22-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis