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) 10160

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
ABIN GEORGE ABRAHAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 77 OF 2026 | CRIME NO.331/2023 | S.C. No.566/2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.K.K.SETHUKUMAR, SMT.SARITHA G.R., SHRI.SREEKRISHNADATH PANDARATHIL E.K., SMT.MEENAKSHY V.S., SMT.PREETHY K.
For the Respondents: SHRI.R.RAHUL

The court may quash proceedings under the law when the parties reach an amicable settlement to maintain harmonious relationships.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to Criminal Miscellaneous Case under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. The petitioner is accused in Crime No.331/2023 involving minor offences under IPC and JJ Act. The dispute was amicably settled; hence, the court quashes further proceedings to maintain harmony. The core issue was the amicable settlement, allowing for quashing as per the law.

Result: Crl. M.C. allowed, quashing further proceedings.

Table of Content
1. factual background of the case and allegations against the accused. (Para 1 , 2)
2. the dispute was settled amicably, indicating mutual agreement to halt prosecution. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. court's observation to maintain harmony and prevent abuse of process. (Para 6)
4. final ruling allowing the quashing of proceedings. (Para 7)

ORDER

Dated this the 29th day of January, 2026 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused in Crime No.331/2023 of Pallikkathode police station, which is pending as S.C. No.566/2023 on the file of District & Sessions Court, Kottayam. The offences alleged against the petitioner is under Sections 323 & 294(b) of IPC and Section 75 of JJ Act.

2. The prosecution case is that on 01.09.2022 at about 8.00 p.m., the accused voluntarily caused hurt to the defacto complainant, who is a minor, abused him using filthy words and thereby he is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the petitioner, the dispute has been amicably settled with the defacto complainant/victim/ respondent and that they agreed to drop all further proceedings relating to the above dispute. Therefore, the petitioner prayed for quashing all further proceedings against him.

4. The 3rd respondent, father of the defacto complainant filed affidavit endorsing the averments in the Criminal MC. According to him, 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 petitioner.

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

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 settled between the parties, quashment of the same is necessary for maintaining harmonious relationship between the parties and also to prevent abuse of process of the court.

7. In the result, This Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in S.C. No.566/2023 on the file of District & Sessions Court, Kottayam, arising from Crime No.331/2023 of Pallikkathode police station, is 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