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) 13974

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
SATHEESH V. P. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 720 OF 2026|CRIME NO.355/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.M.ANUROOP, SRI.M.DEVESH, SHRI.MURSHID ALI M., SMT.JYOTHIS MARY, SMT.S.K.SREELAKSHMY
For the Respondents: SMT.N.R.REESHA

The court allows quashing of proceedings based on amicable settlement in non-heinous matrimonial disputes.

Headnote:This judgment concerns a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. regarding Crime No.355/2025, where the petitioners, accused of cruelty and dowry-related offences under IPC and BNS, sought quashing of proceedings due to amicable settlement with the defacto complainant. The court determined that given the non-heinous nature of the crime and the settlement, quashing was warranted for maintaining harmony.

Result: The Crl.M.C is allowed, quashing all proceedings against the petitioners.

Table of Content
1. petition filed under section 528 of b.n.s.s. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. settlement leads to court's discretion for quashing. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)

ORDER

Dated this the 26th day of February, 2026 This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the accused 1 to 6 in Crime No.355/2025 of Payyannur Police Station, which is pending as CC. No.946/2025 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 498A of IPC and Section 117(2) of BNS.

2. The prosecution case is that the 1st accused being the husband of the defacto complainant and the other accused being his relatives subjected her to cruelty both physically and mentally on the ground of dowry, voluntarily caused 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 and she 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/victim filed affidavit endorsing the averments in the Criminal MC. According to her, the case 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 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.946/2025 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur, arising from Crime No.355/2025 of Payyannur Police Station, stands 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