Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5576

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
SUDHIKUMAR AGED 42 YEARS S/O CHOYI, KUNDILAKATH HOUSE, KARINKAPPARA, ADRISSERY PO, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676106 – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 54 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.144/2018

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT. UMMUL FADLA T.
For the Respondents: SHRI. SASIKUMAR A.R., SMT. HASANATH P.

Quashment of proceedings justified due to amicable settlement in non-heinous private disputes.

Headnote:This petition addresses the quashing of proceedings under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. relating to Crime No.144/2018 after the dispute was amicably settled by the parties. The Court found the offences not to be heinous but of a private nature, justifying quashment for maintaining harmony. The Court emphasized the settled nature of the dispute as paramount to prevent abuse of the judicial process. In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed.

Table of Content
1. petition under b.n.s.s. for quashing proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. affirmation of dispute resolution by parties. (Para 4 , 5)
3. dispute of private nature warrants quashment. (Para 6)
4. final order allowing quashment of proceedings. (Para 7)

ORDER

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2026 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused persons in Crime No.144/2018 of Tanur Police Station, which is pending as CC. No.231/2018 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Parappanangadi. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under sections 143, 147, 447, 323, 506(i) r/w 149 of IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that on 18.03.2018 at about 2.30 p.m., the accused persons trespassed into the courtyard of the residence of the defacto complainant, after forming themselves into an unlawful assembly, wrongfully restrained her and voluntarily caused hurt to her. When CW2 tried to intervene, the 6^th accused voluntarily caused hurt to CW2 and intimidated to do away with her and thereby they are alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the petitioners, the dispute has been settled with the defacto complainant and victims/ respondent No.2 & 3 and all of them 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 and victims filed affidavits endorsing the averments in the Criminal MC. According to them, the case has been amicably settled and that they do not intend to proceed with the case and also that further proceedings in the case can be quashed. They have 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 victims are 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 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 CC. No.231/2018 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Parappanangadi, arising from Crime No.144/2018 of Tanur Police Station, stands quashed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document