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) 6153

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
AJMAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 49 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.1386/2024 | CC NO.2235 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.RAKESH
For the Respondents: KIRAN THOMAS, M.S BREEZ

The court quashed proceedings in a dowry-related case after the parties reached an amicable settlement, emphasizing the non-heinous nature of the allegations.

Headnote:The petitioners filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. for quashing proceedings in Crime No.1386/2024 due to a settled dispute concerning allegations of dowry-related cruelty. The court asserts that the offences are not heinous and the parties have amicably resolved their differences, allowing the quashing of further proceedings. The verdict results in the dismissal of ongoing legal actions against the petitioners.

O R D E R Dated this the 29th day of January, 2026 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused persons 1 and 2 in Crime No.1386/2024 of Manjeri Police Station, Malappuram, which is pending as CC. No.2235/2024 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Manjeri. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 85, 316(2), 3(5) of BNS. 2. The prosecution case is that the 1st accused being the husband of the defacto complainant and the other accused being his relative subjected her to cruelty both physically and mentally on the ground of dowry, misappropriated her gold 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/victim/ respondent No.2 and she 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/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 petitioners.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, after getting instruction from the investigating officer also submitted that the dispute has been settled between the parties and that the victim is not at all interested in continuing the prosecution against the petitioners.

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.

7. In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in CC. No.2235/2024 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Manjeri, arising from Crime No.1386/2024 of Manjeri Police Station, Malappuram, 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