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) 7795

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
ABDUL SAMAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.M.C. NO. 8161 OF 2022|SC NO.791 OF 2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.NIREESH MATHEW
For the Respondents: SRI.MATHEW JACOB, SMT. C.SEENA, P.P.

The court can invoke its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings when disputes are settled between the parties, and there are no further substantial purposes in continuing the case.

Headnote:The petitioner, the sole accused in S.C.No.791/2021, filed a Crl.M.C. under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings against him, citing settlement with the defacto complainant, which was supported by her affidavit. The Public Prosecutor noted the complainant's submission of a signed statement in alignment with her affidavit. The Court observed that the relationship was consensual and continuing proceedings would not serve any purpose, justifying invocation of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Court allowed the application and quashed the proceedings.

Table of Content
1. the petitioner seeks quashing of proceedings citing settlement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. public prosecutor acknowledges the statement of the complainant. (Para 4)
3. the court identifies the consensual nature of the relationship. (Para 5)

O R D E R

The petitioner who is the sole accused in S.C.No.791/2021 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Ottapalam, arising out of Crime No. 308/2021 of Sreekrishnapuram Police Station, Palakkad, has filed this Crl.M.C. under section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing all further proceedings against him.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is submitted that the entire disputes between the petitioner and the defacto complainant are settled and therefore, he prays for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.

3. The 2nd respondent/defacto complainant filed an affidavit stating that the entire disputes between herself and the petitioner has been settled and she does not want to proceed against the petitioner.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition. However, upon instruction, it is submitted that the defacto complainant has given her signed statement to the Station House Officer in tune with the affidavit filed by her before this Court.

5. On a perusal of the F.I.Statement, it is prima facie evident that the relationship between the petitioner and the defacto complainant was a consensual one. In the above circumstances, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the Crl.M.C. any further. Moreover, now the entire disputes between the petitioner and the defacto complainant are settled and the defacto complainant expressed her intention not to proceed against the petitioner. Therefore, this is a fit case in which proceedings can be quashed by invoking the power of this Court under the provisions of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in S.C.No.791/2021 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Ottapalam 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