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) 14250

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
MEGHA THANKACHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 1638 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: ADV SHRI.R.PREMCHAND
For the Respondents: SR. PP. ADV. SRI. BREEZ.M.

The court can quash proceedings under domestic violence laws when parties reach a reconciliation.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to a Criminal Miscellaneous Case concerning the quashing of proceedings against the second respondent accused under Section 31(1) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The petitioner alleges that there has been a settlement in the dispute, indicating that there is no longer a need for proceedings to continue. The court found merit in the petitioner's claim of settlement and quashed all further proceedings. The core issue revolves around the nature of the proceedings initiated under the Act, with the Court concluding that continued legal action was unnecessary in light of the reconciliation between parties. Resultantly, this Crl.M.C is allowed.

Table of Content
1. court acknowledges settlement between parties. (Para 4 , 5)

O R D E R

(Dated this the 24th day of February, 2026)

The de facto complainant in Crime No.508 of 2025 of Hill Palace Police Station, filed this Crl.M.C under Section 528 BNSS praying for quashing all further proceedings against the 2nd respondent/accused in the above crime.

2. The above crime was registered under Section 31 (1)

of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act . The allegation in the above case is that, the accused, who is the husband of the de facto complainant between 1.15 p.m. on 23.05.2025 and 9.30 p.m. on 25.05.2025, voluntarily caused hurt to the de facto complainant and intimidated her, in violation of the protection order passed by Jurisdictional Magistrate.

4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the entire dispute between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent is settled. They are now living happily and therefore, she prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the 2nd respondent.

5. Since it is submitted that the entire dispute between the parties is settled and now the petitioner is living along with the 2nd respondent, there is no meaning in continuing the proceedings against the 2nd respondent and as such, this Crl.M.C is liable to be allowed.

In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the 2nd respondent in Crime No.508 of 2025 of Hill Palace 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