| |
CDJ 2026 MHC 471
|
| Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras |
| Case No : CRL OP No. 35307 of 2025 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA |
| Parties : Suman Voora & Another Versus State by Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Chennai & Another |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioners: C.P. Palanichamy, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, K.M.D. Muhilan, Additional Public Prosecutor, R2, C. Iyyanar, Advocate. |
| Date of Judgment : 21-01-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
B.N.S.S - Section 528 -
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 528 of B.N.S.S
- Sections 406, 420 and 34 of I.P.C.
- Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
2. Catch Words:
- compromise
- non‑compoundable offences
- quash
- criminal proceedings
- public interest
- memo of compromise
3. Summary:
The petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S seeks to quash criminal proceedings (CC No.5118/2023) for offences under Sections 406, 420 and 34 IPC on the basis of a compromise between the parties. The petitioners, acting as power of attorney for a partnership firm, had entered into a sale agreement for land, which later led to the dispute. Both parties presented a Memo of Compromise dated 12‑12‑2025 and appeared before the Court, confirming an amicable settlement. The Additional Public Prosecutor raised the issue of quashing non‑compoundable offences, citing the Supreme Court’s test of individual versus societal interest. The Court held that the offences were purely personal and did not affect public interest, and therefore exercised its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings, subject to a cost order. The related miscellaneous petition was closed, and compliance reporting was scheduled.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S, praying to call for the Records pertaining to the case in CC.No.5118/2023 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for CCB Cases, Egmore, Chennai and quash the same.)
1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in CC.No.5118/2023, for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of I.P.C., on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for CCB Cases, Egmore, Chennai on the ground of compromise.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner in the capacity of Power of attorney of M/s.Master Craft, a Partnership firm, had entered into an agreement of sale with the 2nd respondent / de facto complainant Trust for 27.50 cents of land in Ambattur Taluk on 15.12.2008. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent initially paid an advance of Rs.60,00,000/- and thereafter totally a sum of Rs.1,45,00,000/- was made towards sale of the said land by way of cheques. However, the sale has not been registered in favour of the second respondent Trust due to some discripencies. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise between themselves and the petitioners have repaid the entire amount due to the second respondent. The de facto complainant / second respondent has no grievance as against the petitioners and to that effect, a Memo of Compromise dated 12.12.2025, has also been filed.
4. The petitioner and the de facto complainant were present before this Court at the time of hearing and they were identified by their respective counsel and Mr.D.Mani, Sub Inspector of Police (CCB), Vepery, Chennai.
5. This Court also enquired both the parties and was satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-Police submitted that though the parties have entered into a compromise while this case is pending, this Court, taking into account the seriousness of the offences, has to consider the issue as to whether offences of this nature can be quashed on the ground of compromise between parties.
7. The main issue that requires the consideration of this Court is as to whether this Court can quash the criminal proceedings involving non compoundable offences pending against the petitioner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrat, reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641, has given sufficient guidelines that must be taken into consideration by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./528 BNSS, to quash non-compoundable offences. One very important test that has been laid down is that the Court must necessarily examine if the crime in question is purely individual in nature or a crime against the society with overriding public interest. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that offences against the society with overriding public interest even if they get settled between the parties, cannot be quashed by this Court.
8. In the present case, the offences in question are purely individual/personal in nature. It involves dispute between the petitioners and the de facto complainant and quashing the proceedings, will not affect any overriding public interest in this case and no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings.
9. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.5118/2023 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for CCB Cases, Egmore, Chennai, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./528 BNSS.
10. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.5118/2023 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for CCB Cases, Egmore, Chennai, is quashed, as against the petitioners, subject to condition that the petitioners shall pay costs of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) jointly to the credit of Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, Madras High Court campus, Chennai 600 104, on or before 06.02.2026.
11. The Memo of Compromise dated 12.12.2025, filed by the parties for compromising the offences shall form part of the records. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
12. Post the matter on 09.02.2026 “for reporting compliance.”
|
| |
