IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
SUTHEESH BABU P C – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 89 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.817/2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. amicable resolution leads to quashing of minor charges (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. court emphasizes maintaining harmony through quashing (Para 7) |
| 3. final decision to quash proceedings (Para 8) |
ORDER
Dated this the 29th day of January, 2026 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused in Crime No.817/2025 of Thenipalam police station. The offences alleged against the petitioner is under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 296(b), 351(2), 110 of BNS.
2. The prosecution case is that on 25.09.2025 at about 11.00 p.m., the accused abused the defacto complainant using filthy words, wrongfully restrained her, intimidated to do away with her, voluntarily caused hurt to her by tying a dothy around her neck. It is also alleged that, if the defacto complainant did not pulled away the dothy tied around her neck, the same would have even resulted in causing her death and thereby he is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences. 3. According to the petitioner, the dispute has been amicably settled with the defacto complainant/victim/ respondent No.2 and that 2 she 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/victim 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 interested in continuing the prosecution against the petitioner.
6. Though the offence under Section 126(2) BNS is also involved, the defacto complainant has not sustained serious injury. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that there is no other criminal case against the petitioner.
7. 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 the parties and also to prevent abuse of process of the court.
8. In the result, This Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No.817/2025 of Thenipalam police station, is quashed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S.
Sd/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.