Madras High Court
Naveen Kumar vs The State Rep. By The Inspector Of ... on 27 March, 2026
Author: M. Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M. Nirmal Kumar
CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-03-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025
AND
CRL MP Nos.4098 of 2026 and 22746 OF 2025
CRL OP No.5403 of 2026
1. Naveen Kumar
S/o.Francis
2. Velankanni
W/o.Francis
Both are residing at No.13,
Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Vaishnava College
Main Road, Chrompet,
Chennai - 600 044.
Petitioners/A1 and A2
Vs
1. The State Rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
All women Police Station, Selaiyur,
Chennai. (Crime No.31 of 2025)
2.Agalaya
W/o.Naveen Kumar,
No,16C, Netaji Nagar,
Vishnu Kanchee Street, Kancheepuram
District - 631 501.
Respondent(s)
CRL MP No. 4098 of 2026
1. Naveen Kumar
S/o.Francis,
1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025
2.Velankanni
w/o.Francis,
Both are residing at No.13,
Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Vaisihnava
College Main Road, Chrompet,
Chennai - 600 044.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The State Rep. by the Inspector of
Police,
All women Police Station, Selaiyur,
Chennai. (Crime No.31 of 2025)
2.Agalaya
W/o.Naveen Kumar, No,16C, Netaji
Nagar, Vishnu Kanchee Street,
Kancheepuram District - 631 501.
Respondent(s)
CRL OP No.32694 of 2025
1. Sandhiya @ Sandhiya Francis
D/o.Francis
2. Amul Raj
S/o.P.Munuswamy
Both are residing at No.28,
Lakshmi Nagar, Chrompet,
Chennai - 600 044.
Petitioners/A3 and A4
Vs
1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
All women Police Station, Selaiyur,
Chennai. (Crime No.31 of 2025)
2.Agalaya
W/o.Naveen Kumar,
2/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025
No,16C, Netaji Nagar,
Vishnu Kanchee Street, Kancheepuram
District - 631 501.
Respondent(s)
CRL MP No. 22746 of 2025
1. Sandhiya @ Sandhiya Francis
D/o.Francis
2. Amul Raj
S/o.P.Munuswamy
Both are residing at No.28,
Lakshmi Nagar, Chrompet,
Chennai - 600 044.
Petitioners/A3 and A4
Vs
1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
All women Police Station, Selaiyur,
Chennai. (Crime No.31 of 2025)
2.Agalaya
W/o.Naveen Kumar,
No,16C, Netaji Nagar,
Vishnu Kanchee Street, Kancheepuram
District - 631 501.
Respondent(s)
COMMON PRAYER: These Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section
528 of BNSS, 2023, praying to call for the records in Crime No.31 of 2025 on
the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Selaiyur, Chennai,
to quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Suresh
in both cases
3/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025
For Respondent-1: Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam
in both cases Additional Public Prosecutor
Assisted by
Ms.Harshana, T.
For Respondent-2 : Mr.U.Vignesh
in both cases
COMMON ORDER
Crl.O.P.No.5403 of 2026 filed by the petitioners/A1 and A2 in Crime No.31 of 2025 and Crl.O.P.No.32694 of 2025 filed by the petitioners/A3 and A4 in Crime No.31 of 2025 seeking to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.31 of 2025, on the file of the first respondent police as against the petitioners, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioners and the de facto complainant/second respondent.
2.(i) The petitioner/A1 in Crl.O.P.No.5403 of 2026 is the husband of second respondent/de facto complainant and petitioner/A2 is the mother of A1. The petitioner/A3 in Crl.O.P.No.32694 of 2025 is the sister-in-law of the second respondent and petitioner/A4 is the husband of A3. The second respondent/de facto complainant is the estranged wife of petitioner/A1. The marriage between the petitioner/A1 and the de-facto complainant held on 31.01.2025 at Devi Thirumana Mandapam, Chrompet, Chennai. Out of their marriage, they also blessed with boy baby. It was an arranged marriage. The marriage was sourced through MR Thirumana Thagaval Mayam. Prior to the marriage both the 4/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025 families met in a temple. Thereafter they visited each other’s house and betrothal was conducted. After betrothal, the first petitioner and the second respondent/de facto complainant became close and they visited various places and they had physical relationship. Due to which, the second respondent became pregnant. Even prior to the marriage it was disclosed to both families and thereafter marriage held. After the marriage, for some period the de facto complainant was happy.
(ii) During the marriage it was agreed that her sister-in-law/A3 and her husband/A4 would move out and they will live either in their own house at Guduvancherry or at adjacent street to the de facto complainant’s residence and it was agreed that de facto complainant and her husband and mother-in-law live together. But contrary to the same, the sister-in-law/A3 and brother-in-law/A4 all stayed as joint family and there was frequent misunderstanding and the de facto complainant was forced to do all the household works, cook for the entire family and she was ill-treated and abused. In fact, the de-facto complainant on an occasion attempted to consume poison and end her life. There was a constant demand of dowry by the petitioners herein which fuelled the continuous harassment and finally the de facto complainant was chased out of the matrimonial home. Thereafter family panchayat held. Though it was agreed that de facto complainant would be treated properly, the harassment continued. The 5/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025 first petitioner used to go for work at 9.00 a.m. in the morning and return home only at 10.00 p.m. and he was also not listening to the complaints made by the de facto complainant about the harassment, suffering and cruelty. Further the de facto complainant’s mobile phone forcibly taken away, she was not allowed to talk to anybody and she was treated as slave and was subjected to continuous harassment and cruelty. Hence, she lodged a complaint. Initially, complaint lodged to the Superintendent of Police, which was forwarded to All Woman Police Station, Kanchipuram, who registered ‘Zero F.I.R.’ on 31.07.2025 and later on the point of jurisdiction it was transferred to All Woman Police Station, Selaiyur and a case in Crime No.31 of 2025 registered for offences under Sections 85, 296(b), 115(2) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023.
3.The contention of the petitioners is that the petitioners spent all expenses for the marriage around Rs.15 lakhs. There was no demand of dowry. The petitioner/A1 is employed in a private firm having good income. The mother/A2 is a widow lady with health ailments. The petitioner/A3 is the sister- in-law of the de facto complainant, who was married to the petitioner/A4. The petitioner/A4 is an Ex-Army man, now deputed to NCC and posted at Kanchipuram. Right from the day of marriage, the de facto complainant ill- treated, abused her mother-in-law and sister-in-law and further she insisted for nuclear family and wanted her in-laws to be kept away. The petitioner/A1 is the 6/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025 only son, he cannot shut his moral responsibility and he has to take care of his mother. The de facto complainant attempted to commit suicide for the only reason that petitioner/A1 failed to set up a nuclear family. Thereafter she started abusing her in-laws and later she on her own left the matrimonial home. It was the petitioner and his family members, who brought her back. Thereafter she continued her demand and was not willing to live in a joint family. She was so aggravated and abused the entire family members. Finally, she left matrimonial home on her own. The petitioner/A1 caused legal notice on 02.05.2025 seeking divorce by mutual consent. The de facto complainant sent a reply on 20.05.2025 denying the averments in the notice but insisting that she wanted to continue matrimonial life and not willing for mutual consent and thereafter complaint lodged and on 23.06.2025. Both parties were called in the All Woman Police Station, Kanchipuram and it was agreed that both would approach the civil Court and complaint would be withdrawn. Contrary to the same, she continued the complaint and F.I.R. transferred to respondent police and a case registered.
4.The learned counsel for petitioners submitted that now the issue between the petitioners and the de facto complainant resolved and it was amicably settled. The de facto complainant agreed to continue her matrimonial life. The petitioner/A1 undertakes to take care of his wife and infant baby and they would have a peaceful and matrimonial life. The petitioner/A2/mother 7/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025 though agreed for the compromise, she insisted that de facto complainant cannot impose any restrictions on the joint family set up. The petitioners/A3 and A4 agreed that they would live in another house and they will not be an issue or problem for the peaceful matrimonial life between the husband and wife. The petitioner/A1 confirmed that he forgot all the misdeeds committed by this wife and he is ready to forgive his wife for lodging the complaint considering the welfare of infant baby and also pacify his mother and sister to forgive her and to live a peaceful family life. He also agreed to set up a nuclear family with his wife and son, if it is absolutely required otherwise with the present set up he would continue to lead the peaceful life. All the parties filed separate affidavit and joint compromise memo in this regard.
5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that on the complaint of the de facto complainant/second respondent, a case was registered initially by the All Woman Police Station, Kanchipuram. At that time, the petitioners were called and enquired. Since it is a matrimonial dispute, the police took all steps to resolve the issue. Though the petitioners/A1 and A4 were agreeable to resolve the issue amicably, the mother-in-law/A2 and sister-in- law/A3 were showing some resistance. Since the dispute continued, F.I.R. transferred to All Woman Police Station, Selaiyur on the point of jurisdiction. Now investigation is pending. He further submitted that during the investigation 8/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025 it was informed that the de facto complainant and the petitioners have resolved the issue and a compromise arrived between them. All have agreed that there is no more matrimonial discord and the petitioner/A1 and the de facto complainant agreed to live as husband and wife along with the infant baby and ensured that other petitioners also co-operate for the peaceful matrimonial life.
6.Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that it is a matrimonial discord, which is magnified and led to filing of the complaint by the de facto complainant against her husband and in-laws. Today, the petitioners and the de facto complainant/second respondent along with the infant baby appeared before this Court and they were identified by their respective counsel.
7.On being enquired by this Court, both agreed to continue to live as husband and wife henceforth peacefully. Both were more interested in the welfare of the infant baby and his future. The brother-in-law/A4, who is an army man undertook that his wife/A3 and mother-in-law/A2 would ensure that all peace and happiness would prevail between them.
8.As the parties have now amicably settled the issue among themselves, they seek to quash the First Information Report as against the 9/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025 petitioners. The terms of Joint Compromise Memo signed by both parties is extracted hereunder:
“1. It is humbly submitted that a complaint was lodged by the 2nd party before the 1st respondent herein and the same was registered in crime No.31 of 2025 for the offences U/s. 85, 296(b), 351(2) of BNS against the 1st party herein.
2. It is humbly submitted that after registration of the aforesaid complaint now the entire issue has been compromised between 1st and 2nd party in order to purchase peace. The 2nd party have no interest to continue the prosecution against the 1st party herein. The 2nd party ensured that there shall be no further legal proceedings from his side regarding this case.
3. It is humbly submitted that the 2 nd party have no objection for quashing the proceedings pending against the 1 st party in Crime No. 31 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Selaiyur, Chennai.”
9. Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed and the First Information Report in Crime No.31 of 2025, pending on the file of the first respondent police, is quashed as against the petitioners. The petitioners are discharged from all the charges.
10/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025
10. The affidavits and the Joint Compromise Memo filed by the petitioners and the second respondent for compromising the offences shall form part of the records. Consequently, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
27-03-2026 Index : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order Neutral citation : Yes/No rsi To
1.The Inspector of Police, All women Police Station, Selaiyur, Chennai.
2.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.
11/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025 M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
rsi CRL OP Nos.5403 of 2026 and 32694 of 2025 AND CRL MP Nos.4098 of 2026 and 22746 OF 2025 27.03.2026 12/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis