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) 17979

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
MR. SAMEER P.H. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA. – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 11479 OF 2025 | C.C No.1060 of 2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.R.O.MUHAMED SHEMEEM, SMT.NASEEHA BEEGUM P.S., SMT.ABIDHA M.A., SMT.VIRONICA VINCY P.B.
For the Respondents: SMT. BINDU.O.V

Court allows quashing of proceedings based on amicable settlement in a domestic violence case.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to a criminal miscellaneous case under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. The petitioner, the sole accused in C.C No.1060 of 2023, sought to quash proceedings against him based on an amicable settlement as per Annexure-A2 mediation agreement. The court examined the mediation terms and acknowledged that the parties had resolved their disputes, leading to the decision to quash the criminal charges. The main issue addressed was whether the prosecution could proceed in light of the settlement, which culminated in the court allowing the Crl.M.C and quashing further proceedings against the petitioner.

Table of Content
1. petitioner is the sole accused under ipc and domestic violence act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. no representation from the de facto complainant. (Para 4)
3. settlement leads to quashing of proceedings. (Para 5)
4. crl. m.c allowed. (Para 6)

O R D E R

(Dated this the 27th day of February, 2026)

The petitioner is the sole accused in C.C No.1060 of 2023 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, arising out of Crime No.1171 of 2023 of Thoppumpady Police Station, Ernakulam. He filed this Crl.M.C under Section 528 BNSS praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against the petitioner is under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 31 (1) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act .

2. The prosecution case is that the accused, who is the husband of the de facto complainant, subjected her to cruelty both physically and mentally on the ground of dowry and violated the protection order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the entire dispute between the petitioner and the de facto complainant was settled as per Annexure-A2 mediation agreement. According to the learned counsel, as per the terms of compromise, the Family Court, Ernakulam, had already passed a judgment in O.P No.2464 of 2025 after accepting Annexure-A2 compromise in the said judgment. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner has complied with the terms of Annexure-A2 and as such, this Crl.M.C is liable to be allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner is liable to be quashed.

4. When this matter was taken up for arguments, there was no representation for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant.

5. On a perusal of Annexure-A2 mediation agreement, it is revealed that the parties have settled all their dispute and they decided to quash the criminal case against the petitioner in C.C No.1060 of 2023 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi.

6. In the above circumstance, this Crl.M.C is liable to be allowed.

In the result, this Crl. M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C No.1060 of 2023 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, arising out of Crime No.1171 of 2023 of Thoppumpady Police Station, Ernakulam, 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