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) 57743

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
ARATHY ASOKAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 9383 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.ANJALI G.KRISHNAN
For the Respondents: SMT.ISAMOL BABY, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
P-SRI.A.VIPIN NARAYAN

Quashing of criminal proceedings based on a mediated settlement between parties.

Headnote:The Court analyzed the mediation settlement under relevant sections of IPC, revealing parties resolved disputes. The Court noted a plea to quash proceedings for the petitioner based on the compromise. The Court framed main issues regarding continuance of cases and confirmed the quashing, emphasizing clauses in mediation agreements.

Table of Content
1. overview of the case and parties involved. (Para 1)
2. arguments presented regarding mediation and the need for quashing. (Para 2 , 3)
3. court's observation on mediation and proceedings. (Para 4)

O R D E R Dated this the 17th day of December, 2025 Petitioner is the accused in CC. No.318/2024 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thripunithura arising out of Crime No.265/2024 of Udayamperoor Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 341 and 323 of IPC .

2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the entire dispute between the parties were settled as per Annexure-A5 compromise entered into between the parties before the Ernakulam Mediation Centre. Therefore, she prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that a counter case against the 3rd respondent is pending and she seeks time for filing a Criminal Miscellaneous Case (Criminal) to quash the above case also.

4. Though Annexure A5 was passed as early as in October, 2024, so far the 3rd respondent has not filed any petition to quash the case as against her. Therefore, as argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, non- fling of the Criminal M.C. by the 3rd respondent is not a ground for continuing the case pending against the petitioner. Since the entire disputes between the parties were already settled as per Annexure A5 mediation agreement, this Criminal M.C. is liable to be allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioner is liable to be quashed.

In the result, this Criminal M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in CC.No.318/2024 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thripunithura, arising out of Crime No.265/2024 of Udayamperoor Police Station, stands quashed. It is made clear that in case the 3rd respondent files appropriate application to quash the case as against her in pursuance to Exhibit P5 mediation agreement, the same will be considered at the relevant time.

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