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) 6255

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
DINU CHANDRAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 5608 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.T.P.PRADEEP, SRI.P.K.SATHEES KUMAR, SRI.R.K.PRASANTH, SMT.MINIKUMARY M.V, SHRI.JIJO JOSEPH
For the Respondents: SMT.GISA SUSAN THOMAS, SMT.A.R.DIVYA

Maintaining harmony and preventing process abuse can justify quashing criminal proceedings, especially when parties have reached an amicable settlement.

Headnote:This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., regarding the quashing of proceedings pertaining to Crime No.188/2020 of Thiruvalla Police Station. The case involved allegations under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 324 r/w 34 IPC based on an incident on 05.02.2020 where the accused allegedly harmed the defacto complainant while trying to take away her child. The parties amicably settled their dispute, with the victims filing affidavits stating they do not intend to proceed further. The Public Prosecutor confirmed the settlement. The court found the offences to be private in nature and not of serious magnitude, thus allowing the petition to maintain harmony and prevent process abuse.

Table of Content
1. summary of case facts and accusations. (Para 1 , 2)
2. parties reached an amicable settlement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. court's rationale for quashing proceedings. (Para 6)

ORDER

Dated this the 30th day of January, 2026 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused persons in Crime No.188/2020 of Thiruvalla Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 324 r/w

34 IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that on 05.02.2020 at about 05.00 p.m., when the defacto complainant tried to restrain the accused persons from taking away her minor child, they voluntarily caused hurt to the defacto complainant, abused her using filthy words 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/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 settled between the parties and that the victims are not at all 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 amicably 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.

In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.188/2020 of Thiruvalla 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