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) 52151

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
ABID – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 9089 OF 2025 | CRIME NO.514/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.K.RAJEEV, SRI.BIJO MATHEW JOY, SMT.NIVEDITHA R. MENON
For the Respondents: SRI.U.JAYAKRISHNAN

Amicable settlement between parties can necessitate quashing of proceedings in non-heinous matrimonial disputes.

Headnote:This judgment deals with a petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., regarding Crime No.514 of 2025 where the accused was alleged to have committed offences under Sections 406 and 498A IPC. The court found that the dispute had been amicably settled, as endorsed by the defacto complainant and the Public Prosecutor, indicating no further grievance against the accused. The court framed the issues as whether to quash the proceedings based on the amicable settlement. The court reasoned that maintaining harmonious relations justified the quashment of proceedings. In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed, quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.

Table of Content
1. filing of the petition under section 528. (Para 1 , 2)
2. settlement and withdrawal of complaints. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. court's opinion on quashing based on the nature of the dispute. (Para 6)
4. final order allowing the quashing. (Para 7)

O R D E R

This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the

1st accused in Crime No.514 of 2025 of Mukkom Police Station, Kozhikode, which is pending as C.C.No.508 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-II, Thamarassery. The offencec alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 406 and

498A IPC .

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

3. According to the petitioner, the dispute has been settled with the defacto complainant and she had agreed to drop all further proceedings relating to the above dispute. Therefore, the petitioner prayed for quashing all further proceedings against him.

4. The Defacto complainant 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 petitioner.

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 petitioner.

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 petitioner in C.C.No.508 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-II, Thamarassery arising from Crime No.514 of 2025 of Mukkom Police Station, Kozhikode, 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