Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48937
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
SOMAN AGED 62 YEARS S/O NARAYAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 7421 OF 2025 | C.C. NO. 220 OF 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.SHILPA K.K.
For the Respondents: SRI.K.R.SUNIL
The court may quash proceedings in private disputes if amicable settlement ensures justice and maintains harmony.
Headnote:The petitioners filed a request for the quashing of proceedings in a criminal case relating to allegations under IPC sections, citing an amicable settlement with the victim, who endorsed the same. The court highlighted the importance of maintaining harmonious relationships among parties and referenced a precedent where quashing was deemed appropriate when compromise would serve justice. Consequently, the court quashed ongoing proceedings.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background and nature of charges. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. statement from the complainant on settlement. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. judicial reasoning for quashing. (Para 7) |
ORDER
Dated this the 30th day of October, 2025 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in Crime No. 653 of 2022 of Kayamkulam Police Station, which is pending as C.C. No. 220 of 2023 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kayamkulam. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 448 , 454, 324, 326, 392, 294(b)
r/w 34 IPC .
2. The prosecution case is that on 25.06.2022 at about 8.00 a.m., due to their enmity towards CW1, the accused persons trespassed into the property belonging to the husband of CW1, abused her in filthy language, wrongfully restrained her, voluntarily caused hurt and grevious hurt to her, and thereby committing the alleged offences.
3. According to the petitioners, the dispute has been settled with the defacto complainant/victim/ respondent No.2 and she agreed to drop all further proceedings relating to the above dispute. Therefore, the petitioners prayed for quashing all further proceedings against them.
4. The Defacto complainant/victims filed affidavit endorsing the averments in the Criminal MC. According to her, the case has been amicably settled and that she does not intend to proceed with the case and also that further proceedings in the case can be quashed. She has no further grievance against the petitioners.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor, after getting instruction from the investigating officer also submitted that the dispute has been settled between the parties and that the victim are not at all interested in continuing the prosecution against the petitioners.
6. It is true that the offences involved in this case include Section
448, 454, 324, 326, 392, 294(b) r/w 34 IPC . But still it has to be stated that when the crime is the offshoot of private issues between the parties, and they have resolved the issues amicably, the quashment of proceedings could be resorted to maintain harmonious relationship between the parties. The proposition of law in the above regard has been laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court inYogendra Yadav v. State of Jharkhand [(2014) 9 SCC 653], wherein it has been held that when quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace, and would secure ends of justice, High Court should not hesitate to quash them.
7. It appears that the issue involved in this case is purely private in nature. As the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and the defacto complainant and the other aggrieved persons are not at all interested in continuing the prosecution, there is no purpose to be fulfilled by the continuance of the prosecution in this case. Therefore, this is a fit case in which further proceedings can be quashed by invoking the inherent power of this court. Such a course is also required to maintain the harmonious relationship between the parties and also to prevent abuse of process of the court.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in C.C. No. 220 of 2023 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kayamkulam arising from Crime No. 653 of
