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) 5583

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
THAHA HUSAIN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 3796 OF 2024 | CRIME NO.437/2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.M.FIROZ, SMT.M.SHAJNA
For the Respondents: SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZ

Settling disputes between parties can lead to quashing of criminal proceedings under certain circumstances.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings in Crime No.437/2019, alleging offences under IPC Sections 354(c), 376(2)(n), 406, and 506(i). The court found that the dispute had been settled and continuing proceedings would constitute an abuse of process, allowing the petition. The outcome quashed all further proceedings against the petitioner.

Table of Content
1. accused petition for quashing charges. (Para 1 , 2)
2. parties have settled the dispute. (Para 3 , 4)
3. proceedings quashed due to consent. (Para 6)

O R D E R Dated this the 29th day of January, 2026 The petitioner, who is the sole accused in Crime No.437/2019 of Ambalavayal Police Station filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 354(c), 376(2)(n), 406 and 506(i) of IPC .

2. The prosecution case is that during the period from 16.12.2016 to

15.11.2019, the accused repeatedly committed rape upon the defacto complainant after promising to marry her, appropriated her gold and money, intimidated her and thereby he is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, now, the entire dispute between the parties were settled and therefore, he prayed for quashing all further proceedings against he petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant also submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties. The defacto complainant also filed an affidavit stating that the dispute between herself and the petitioner are settled and that she does not want to proceed against the petitioner.

5. The petitioner was opposed by the learned Public prosecutor.

However, upon instructions, he submitted that the defacto complainant had already given signed statement to the SHO, in tune with the averments in the affidavit filed before this Court.

6. On a perusal of the FI statement itself, it is evident that the relationship between the petitioner and the defacto complainant was a consensual one. In the above circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings against the petitioner as it will only be an abuse of the process of the court. Therefore, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No.437/2019of Ambalavayal Police Station, now pending as L.P. No.24/2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-i, Sulthanbathery, is quashed.

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