CRL OP/32313/2025 of SURYA Vs The Inspector of Police,
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.04.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025 and
Crl.M.P.Nos.22447 & 23883 of 2025
Crl.O.P.No.32313 of 2025:
1.Surya
2.Dillibabu
3.Praveenkumar
4.Naveenkumar
5.Nandhakumar @ Nanthakumar
6.Jegan @ Jagankumar
7.Jalakandeeshwaran @ Jalagandeswaran
8.Narasimman ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police,
Kondapalayam Police Station,
Ranipet District.
(Crime No.191/2025).
2.Munieeswaran,
Sub Inspector of Police,
Kondapalayam Police,
Ranipet District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for records from the 1 st respondent
Police in Crime No.191 of 2025 and to quash the same.
Page No.1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Thirumoorthy
For R1 : Mr.R.Vinothraja,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side) assisted by
Ms.Harshana.T
Crl.O.P.No.34128 of 2025:
1.Thennarasu
2.Kaviyarasu
3.Arun @ Arunkumar
4.Vignesh
5.Rajadurai
6.Anishkumar
7.Sakthivel ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police,
Kondapalayam Police Station,
Ranipet District.
(Crime No.191/2025).
2.Munieeswaran,
Sub Inspector of Police,
Kondapalayam Police,
Ranipet District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for records from the 1 st respondent
Police in Crime No.191 of 2025 and to quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Sukumaran
For R1 : Mr.R.Vinothraja,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
Page No.2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
COMMON ORDER
The petitioners (A1 to A8) in Crl.O.P.No.32313 of 2025 and the
petitioners (A9 to A15) in Crl.O.P.No.24128 of 2025 filed Quash Petitions to
quash the FIR in Crime No.191 of 2025 dated 21.10.2025 for offence under
Sections 189(3), 296(b), 194 & 115(2) of BNS, on the file of the 1 st respondent
Police.
2.Case of the prosecution is that on 21.10.2025, the 2 nd respondent, Sub
Inspector of Police lodged a complaint stating that on 19.10.2025 at about
03.30 p.m., when he was on patrol duty in Kodaikkal village and passing by
Government High School, Kodaikkal, he saw villagers assembled in the
playground in two groups and engaged in a fight during a game of cricket .
The 2 nd respondent asked them to disperse, and they dispersed. Again on
20.10.2025 at about 06.00 p.m., near Village Administrative Office, Kodaikkal
village, both groups found fighting. Hence, the FIR came to be registe red in
Crime No.191 of 2025 for offence under Sections 189(3), 296(b), 194 &
115(2) of BNS against the petitioners herein.
3.Learned counsels appearing for the petitioners in both petitions
submitted that the petitioners/both groups are from the same village . One
Page No.3 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
group from the village and the other group from the colony. While pla ying
cricket, fight arose between them. The petitioners, in teens, in a rush of blood,
picked up a quarrel, exchanged heated words, and there was a push a nd pull,
thereafter, both groups got separated. Subsequently, the groups again
assembled near the Village Administrative Office and picked up a quarrel.
This incident magnified as though both groups were fighting and not heeding
the advice of the Police to disperse, hence, committed the offence . Further
submitted that arraying one group as A1 to A8 and the other group a s A9 to
A15 in a single FIR, it is certain the investigation would lead to nowhere and
further continuation of the case against the petitioners would create obstacle to
their future studies and career. The petitioners belong to the same locality, but
residing in different parts of the village. All of them are stude nts pursuing
their education. Now with the intervention of the elders and fami ly members,
the issue got resolved amicably and both groups are now friendly playing
games together and living in harmony and filed quash petitions. In su pport of
their compromise, the petitioners filed joint compromise memo and prayed for
quashing the FIR.
4.Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the 1st respondent
Police submitted that in this case, the complainant/2 nd respondent is a Sub
Page No.4 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
Inspector of Police attached to the 1 st respondent Police Station. While he was
on patrol duty on 19.10.2025, found the petitioners in two groups fighting with
each other during the game of cricket, using abusive words, and there was
push and pull. Despite the 2nd respondent warning them to disperse, the
petitioners not heeded and continued their fight. Again, on 20.10.2025, near
the Village Administrative Office, the two groups were found fighting. Hence,
to deter them from continuing such act and to prevent further escala tion of
tension leading to serious offence, FIR registered. He fairly su bmitted that it
was a fight between two groups during the game of cricket and all the
petitioners are teenagers pursuing their education and have no bad antecedents.
He further submitted that on verification with the villagers a nd elders, it is
found the issue between them resolved amicably and compromise arrived at
and all are residing in harmony.
5.Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is seen
that the petitioners during the game of cricket, had a dispute and f ight between
them. Now at the intervention of the elders and family members, the issue
resolved and the compromise arrived at between them and they have no bad
antecedents. Further the continuation of proceedings against the two groups in
one FIR would lead to nowhere.
Page No.5 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
6.Today all the petitioners appeared before this Court and their
identification confirmed by Mr.G.Marimuthu, Special Sub Inspector of P olice
attached to the 1 st respondent Police Station. This Court had interaction with
the petitioners who confirmed the compromise arrived between them and filing
of joint compromise memo. Scanned reproduction of the joint compromise
memo is as follows:
Page No.6 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
Page No.7 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
7.Under such circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in keeping
the First Information Report pending, even though, the offences involved are
not compoundable in nature. In the light of the guidelines given by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2017 9 SCC 641- (Parbathbhai Aahir @
Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath), and after exercising due caution as advised
by the Hon'ble Suprme Court in The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv
Gurjar and Another reported in (2019) 2 MLJ Crl (10) , this Court in exercise
of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is inclined to quash the FIR.
8.In the result, Criminal Original Petitions stand allowed and the FIR in
Crime No.119 of 2025 dated 21.10.2015 on the file of the 1 st respondent Police
is quashed against the petitioners/A1 to A15. Consequently, connected
Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
17.04.2026
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
Index: Yes/No
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
vv2
Page No.8 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Kondapalayam Police Station,
Ranipet District.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court.
Page No.9 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
Crl.O.P.Nos.32313 & 34128 of 2025
17.04.2026
Page No.10 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis