SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52145

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
VINEETH G., GIRIJA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 8313 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.GEORGE MATHEW, SRI.V.S.VINEETH KUMAR, SHRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G, SHRI.MATHEW K.T, SHRI.GEORGE K.V, SHRI.ADITHYA BENZEER, SMT.MEDHA B.S., SRI.JOHN ZACHARIAS
For the Respondents: SRI.A.VIPIN NARAYAN, SR.PP

When a private dispute is amicably settled, the court may quash further proceedings to maintain harmony, particularly in non-heinous cases.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. regarding Crime No.1237 of 2024. The prosecution alleged that the accused subjected the complainant to cruelty concerning dowry. However, the complainant affirmed that the dispute was amicably settled, indicating no intention to pursue the case further. The Public Prosecutor supported this stance, leading the court to quash the proceedings as the matter was not of a heinous nature. The court emphasized maintaining harmonious relationships among the parties involved.

Table of Content
1. amicable resolution of a matrimonial dispute (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. quashing to ensure harmony in settled matters (Para 6)
3. final decision quashing proceedings (Para 7)

O R D E R

This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.1237 of 2024 of Fort Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, which is pending as Crl.M.C.No.2204 of 2024 on the file of Additional Sessions Court-IV, Thiruvananthapuram. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 498-A r/w 34 IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that the 1st accused being the husband of the defacto complainant and the other accused being his relative subjected her to cruelty both physically and mentally on the ground of dowry and thereby they alleged to have committed the aforesaid offence.

3. According to the petitioners, the dispute has been settled with the defacto complainant/victim/ respondent No.3 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/victim 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 all 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 amicably settled between the parties and that the victim is not at all interested in continuing the prosecution against the petitioners.

6. Considering the fact that the offence involved in this case is not heinous and very serious, but purely a matrimonial and private dispute, which has been amicably settled between the parties, quashment of further proceedings is necessary for maintaining harmonious relationship between the parties.

7. In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2204 of 2024 on the file of Additional Sessions Court-IV, Thiruvananthapuram, arising from Crime No.1237 of 2024 of Fort Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, stands quashed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top