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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 4412

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
VISHNU PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 2357 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.SAMSUDIN
For the Respondents: SRI.M.ANUROOP

Quashing of criminal proceedings is permissible when parties settle a matrimonial dispute amicably.

Headnote:This criminal miscellaneous case involves a petition for quashing proceedings under Sections 85, 115(2), and 351(2) of B.N.S. Allegations against the accused include cruelty and intimidation. The parties reached an amicable settlement with the victim withdrawing her complaint. The court ruled that due to the nature of the dispute and its resolution, quashing the proceedings is appropriate. The resulting order allows the quashment of proceedings.

Table of Content
1. nature of allegations and settlement between parties. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. court's reasoning for quashing proceedings. (Para 6)

ORDER

Dated this the 27th day of January, 2026 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S ., by the accused in Crime No. 29 of 2025 of Kalikavu Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 85 , 115(2) and 351(2) of the B.N.S.

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, voluntarily caused hurt to her, intimidated her and thereby he alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the petitioner, the dispute has been amicably settled with the defacto complainant and that 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.

In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No. 29 of 2025 of Kalikavu Police Station, stands quashed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S .

Sd/-

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