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) 14533

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
ABDUL ARSHAD. K – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 614 OF 2026 | CP NO.62 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.R.ANAS MUHAMMED SHAMNAD
For the Respondents: SHRI.SALEEK.C.A., SMT. C.SEENA

The court upheld the quashing of proceedings in cases where parties amicably resolve disputes involving non-heinous offences.

Headnote:The case discusses the petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. concerning offences under Sections 78(1)(i) and 75(1)(ii). The complainant and the accused have settled the dispute amicably and do not wish to proceed. The Public Prosecutor supports quashing the proceedings due to the trivial nature of offences. The Court found grounds to maintain harmony and prevent court process abuse, thus quashing the proceedings.

Result: The Crl. M.C is allowed, and the proceedings are quashed.

Table of Content
1. amicable resolution of disputes (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. court's discretion to quash non-heinous offences (Para 6)
3. final ruling to quash the proceedings (Para 7)

O R D E R

(Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2026)

This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. , by the 1st accused in Crime No.587 of 2025 of Manjeswar Police Station, which is pending as CP. No.62 of 2025 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kasargod. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections

78(1)(i), 75(1)(ii) of BNS.

2. The prosecution case is that on 13.06.2025 at about 4.00 pm and also on previous days, the accused secretly followed the defacto complainant and showed obscene gestures towards her and thereby he is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. According to the petitioner, the dispute has been settled with the defacto complainant and all of them agreed to drop all further proceedings relating to the above dispute. Therefore, the petitioner prayed for quashing all further proceedings against them.

4. The Defacto complainant and victim filed affidavits endorsing the averments in the Criminal MC. According to them, 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 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 victims are not at all 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 amicably settled between the parties, quashment of the same is necessary for maintaining harmonious relationship between them 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 petitioners in CP. No.62 of 2025 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kasargod arising from Crime No.587 of 2025 of Manjeswar 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