The Supreme Court of India, on October 28, 2025, ruled that a petition filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) (equivalent to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) seeking the quashing of proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D.V. Act) is legally maintainable.
The Court set aside an order by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore, which had dismissed such a petition as “not maintainable.” The matter has been remitted back to the High Court for fresh consideration on its merits.
The order was passed by a division bench comprising Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Manmohan in a criminal appeal arising from Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 9534 of 2025.
Background of the Appeal
The appellants had approached the Supreme Court challenging an order dated December 10, 2024, passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore.
Before the High Court, the appellants had filed a petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (Section 482 Cr.P.C.), seeking to quash proceedings initiated against them by the respondent under the D.V. Act.
The High Court dismissed this quashing petition, holding that it was not maintainable. The appellants then filed the special leave petition before the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s dismissal.
Court’s Analysis and Decision
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal on October 28, 2025.
The judgment noted that the legal position on this issue was not in dispute between the parties. Paragraph 3 of the order states, “Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that the law on the issue is well settled by a judgment of this Court in Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS. Vidhi Rawal¹, wherein it was opined that the petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. challenging proceedings emanating from Section 12(1) of the D.V. Act is maintainable.”
In light of this established precedent, the Supreme Court found that the High Court’s view could not be upheld.
“In view of the aforesaid judgment of this Court, the view expressed by the High Court holding the quashing to be not maintainable, cannot be legally sustained,” the bench declared in paragraph 4.
Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court’s order. Paragraph 5 of the order states: “The impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside and the matter is remitted back for fresh consideration on merits.”
The Supreme Court directed the parties to appear before the High Court on November 11, 2025. The appeal and all pending applications were disposed of accordingly.
