Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 6264

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
1 SAFARIAS AGED 34 YEARS S/O ABOOBACKER, SAMEERA MANZIL, MAMBADAN HOUSE, THURAKKAL.P.O, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 676505 – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 11396 OF 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.M.RAFIQ
For the Respondents: SMT.ANN SUSAN GEORGE

Quashing of proceedings in settled matrimonial disputes is permissible for maintaining harmony.

Headnote:The petitioners filed a petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. relating to Crime No.369/2021, alleging offences under Sections 498A, 406, 341, 323, 326, 201 r/w 34 IPC. The prosecution claimed that the petitioners subjected the complainant to cruelty; however, the complainant later settled and agreed to quash the proceedings. The court observed that the matter was a non-heinous, matrimonial dispute, and allowed the petition for quashment.

Result: All further proceedings against the petitioners are quashed.

Table of Content
1. facts of settled dispute with agreement to quash. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. prosecution support for quashment. (Para 5)
3. court's observation on the nature of the case. (Para 6)

ORDER

Dated this the 30^th day of January, 2026 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused 1 to 3 in Crime No.369/2021 of Kondotty Police Station, which is pending as CC. No.62/2022 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections

498A, 406, 341, 323, 326, 201 r/w 34 IPC.

2. The prosecution case is that the 1st accused being the husband of the defacto complainant/CW1 and the other accused being his relatives subjected her to cruelty both physically and mentally on the ground of dowry, misappropriated her gold, voluntarily caused hurt and grievous hurt to 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/victim/respondent No.2 & 3 and they 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/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 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.

In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in CC. No.62/2022 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram, arising from Crime No.369/2021 of Kondotty Police Station, stands quashed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document