Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 21086
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, J
... AGED 28 YEARS ...., PIN - 695007 – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 11046 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.G.RANJU MOHAN, SMT.M.SANTHI, SMT.SAREENA.S, SHRI.PYARIN B. KURUVITHADAM, SHRI.MUHAMMED SHATHIL C.K.
For the Respondents: SMT.THEERTHA NAIR A.P.
Consent can negate the abuse of process in criminal proceedings when disputes are settled between the parties.
Headnote:This judgment involves a petition filed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for quashing proceedings for alleged offences under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 506 of IPC, Section 67B of the IT Act, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The parties settled their dispute, as substantiated by affidavits. The court observed that further proceedings would amount to abuse of process since the relationship was consensual and the complaint had been resolved, leading to the decision to quash proceedings.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of allegations against the petitioner. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. parties reconciled and settled out of court. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's assessment of the relationship and settlement. (Para 5 , 6) |
ORDER
Dated this the 17th day of March, 2026 The sole accused in Crime No. 323 of 2024 of Valiyathura police station has filed this petition under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., praying for quashing all further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 376 , 376 (2)(n) and 506 of the IPC , Section 67B of the Information Technology Act and Section 3 (2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act .
2. The prosecution case as revealed from the FIR is that the accused, who is not a member of the scheduled caste or scheduled tribe, with a knowledge that the defacto complainant belongs to scheduled caste community, with the intention to satisfy his sexual lust, made friendship with her, promised to marry her and committed rape upon her repeatedly during the period from 10.11.2019 to 31.01.2020, captured her nude photographs on his mobile phone, intimidated her and thereby he is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.
3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the entire dispute between the petitioner and the defacto complainant has been settled. Therefore, he prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant also submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and she does not want to proceed with this case. She has also filed an affidavit to that effect before this Court.
5. The petition was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. However, upon instructions she submitted that the defacto complainant had already given a signed statement to the SHO in tune of the averments in the affidavit filed before this Court.
6. On a perusal of the FI statement, it can be seen that the petitioner and the defacto complainant became lovers and they had sexual relationship with each other at different places and on different dates from November 2019 onwards till April 2023. Therefore, prima facie, it can be seen that the relationship between them was a consensual one. Moreover, now the entire dispute between them has been settled and the defacto complainant filed an affidavit to that effect. Therefore, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings against the petitioner, as the same will only be an abuse of the process of the Court. Therefore, 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 Crime No. 323 of 2024 of Valiyathura police station, is quashed.
Sd/-
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, JUDGE NJ APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 11046 OF 2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A3 HON’BLE COURT HAS DISMISSED THE CRL MC
8753/2024 AND THE ORDER DATED 21-10-
2024
