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) 13592

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
SOMAN N P – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 992 OF 2026 | Crime No.1249/2023 | CC No.34 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: B.SURJITH, RAHANA JOSE, LIJO JOSEPH, AKSHAYA REGHU
For the Respondents: C.SEENA

Vague allegations without specific details cannot sustain a legal proceeding under Section 498A IPC.

Headnote:The Court considers the petition for quashing proceedings against accused under Section 498A IPC. The allegations of cruelty made are vague and lack specifics required for prosecution. The absence of material particulars indicates that continuing proceedings would be an abuse of the Court's process. The case is quashed under these circumstances. (Paragraphs 1-6)

Table of Content
1. accused involved in a case regarding alleged cruelty. (Para 2)
2. arguments regarding the lack of specifics in the complaint. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's observation on the proceedings' validity. (Para 5)
4. final decision to quash proceedings. (Para 6)

O R D E R Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2026 The accused persons 1 to 3 involved in CC. No.34/2024 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudy, arising out of Crime No.1249/2023 of Mala Police Station, field this Crl.M.C under Section 528 of the BNSS praying for quashing all further proceedings against them. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under section 498A r/w 34 of IPC . 2. The prosecution case is that the 1st accused being the husband of the defacto complainant and other accused persons being his relatives, subjected the defacto complainant to cruelty both physically and mentally demanding more dowry and thereby they are alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the allegations levelled against the petitioners do not constitute the offence under Section 498A of IPC . Therefore, he prayed for quashing all further proceedings against them.

4. The petition was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. Though notice was served on the defacto complainant/2nd respondent, she did not turn up.

5. On a perusal of the FI statement, it can be seen that though several allegations are raised against the petitioners, not even a single specific instance with material particulars like date is stated in the FIS. In the absence of any specific pleading with material particulars like date, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings against the petitioners as the same will only be an abuse of the process of the Court.

6. Therefore, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in CC. No.34/2024 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudy, arising out of Crime No.1249/2023 of Mala Police Station, 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