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) 52149

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
RATHEESH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 8902 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.IRFAN ZIRAJ, SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ
For the Respondents: SRI.V.RENJITH KUMAR, SRI.A.VIPIN NARAYAN, SR.PP

Quashing of proceedings is justified when the dispute is amicably settled and does not involve severe offenses.

Headnote:This case concerns a petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. by the accused in Crime No.502 of 2020, where the petitioners alleged the offences under IPC. The prosecution asserted that the accused committed indecent acts against the complainant. However, the court found that the dispute was amicably settled, noting that the complainant endorsed this in an affidavit. The court determined the offenses were not severe in nature and allowing quashing would maintain harmony. This Crl. M.C is allowed with quashing as stated.

Table of Content
1. petition filed under b.n.s.s. (Para 1 , 2)
2. amicable settlement and complainant's consent. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. offenses are not severe, quashing promotes harmony. (Para 6)
4. final ruling to quash all proceedings. (Para 7)

O R D E R

This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.502 of 2020 of Infopark Police Station, which is pending as C.C.No.3 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Kakkanad. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 354A (1)(i), 354A(1)(ii), 354A(1)(iv), 509, 294(b) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

2. The prosecution case is that on 04.10.2020, at about

11 a.m., the accused persons showed obscene gestures to the defacto complainant, abused CWs1 to 4 in filthy words and thereby they alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the petitioners, the dispute has been amicably settled with the defacto complainant/victim/3rd respondent and that she has agreed to drop all further proceedings relating to the above dispute. Therefore, they prayed for quashing all further proceedings against them.

4. The Defacto complainant/3rd respondent filed affidavit endorsing the averments in the Criminal MC. According to him/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. He/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 de facto complainant/ victim is not interested in continuing the prosecution against the petitioners.

6. Considering the fact that the offences involved in this case are not heinous and very serious, but purely of private in nature and now the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties, quashment of the same is necessary for maintaining harmonious relationship between them and also to prevent abuse of process of the court.

7. In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.3 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Kakkanad, arising from Crime No.502 of 2020 of Infopark Police Station, 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