IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
FIDHA MUHAMMED SAYD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 271 OF 2026 | CRIME NO. 1236/2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed under specific legal provisions. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. dispute settled amicably with compliance from the victim. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court justifies quashing to ensure harmony between parties. (Para 6) |
ORDER
This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., by the accused Nos.1 to 7 in Crime No.1236 of 2024 of Aryanad Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Section 120 B r/w Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 (for short “ the Act, 2019).
2. The prosecution case is that the 1st accused, who married the defacto complainant on 23.09.2018 with the connivance of the other accused persons, divorced her by pronouncing talaq in violation of the provisions of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 and thereby they alleged to have committed the offences Section 120 B r/w Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, 2019.
3. According to the petitioners, the dispute has been amicably settled with the defacto complainant/victim/
respondent No.4 and that she agreed to drop all further proceedings relating to the above dispute. Therefore, they 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 dispute 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 instructions from the investigating officer also submitted that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and that the defacto complainant/victim is not 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 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.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.1236 of 2024 of Aryanad Police Station, stands quashed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S.
Sd/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.