[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Devadarshan vs State Of Kerala on 10 December, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:95307
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025
CRIME NO.62/2022 OF Marangattupally Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.214 OF 2022 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,PALA
PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 4 :
1 DEVADARSHAN,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O SAJI, ALATHAKUNNEL HOUSE, VAYALA PO, VAYALA KARA,
KADAPLAMATTOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN -
686587
2 ABHIJITH K. A,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O ANILKUMAR, KAROTTUVETTIKATTIL HOUSE,
MARANGATTUPPILLY PO, ELACKADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 686635
3 KAILASKUMAR S,
AGED 23 YEARS
S/O SASI KUMAR, KOOTTUMALA HOUSE, VAYALA PO,
KADAPLAMATTOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN -
686587
4 GOKUL T. APPUKUTTAN,
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O APPUKKUTTAN, NELLIKKOTTU HOUSE, KALIKAVU,
PAKALAMATTOM PO, KURAVILANGADU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 686633
BY ADVS.
SHRI.PRAVEEN S.
SMT.AJISHA M.S.
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:95307
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 REJIL P. R,
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O. RAJU, PARACKEL HOUSE, KADAPOOR, VATTUKULAM PO,
KANAKKARI VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 686587
BY ADV SHRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G
SR PP SRI C S HRITHWIK
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:95307
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of December, 2025
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 4 in
C.C.No.214/2022 on the file of the Court of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate -I, Pala,(Trial Court), which has
arisen from Crime No.62/2022 registered by the
Marangattuppalli Police Station, Kottayam, alleging the
commission of the offences punishable under Sections
341, 323 and 324 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
2. The petitioners have invoked the inherent
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash all
further proceedings in the above case. It is asserted
that the dispute that led to the registration of the crime
has been amicably settled between the petitioners and
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:95307
the 2nd respondent, who has executed Annexure A3
affidavit, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent.
4. The learned counsel on either side submits that,
with the intervention of relatives and well-wishers, the
parties have resolved their disputes amicably. The 2 nd
respondent has no subsisting grievance and does not
wish to pursue the prosecution, and has no objection to
the proceedings being quashed.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions,
submits that the Investigating Officer has reported that
the 2nd respondent (defacto complainant) could not be
contacted. Thus an externment order has been issued
against him. Therefore, he is absconding. However,
Annexure A3 affidavit is seems to have been executed
by him.
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:95307
6. The scope and ambit of the inherent powers of
this Court to quash criminal proceedings on the ground
of settlement between the parties have been
authoritatively laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, in
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303],
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and
Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688], Naushey Ali v. State of
U.P. [(2025) 4 SCC 78], and in a host of judicial
pronouncements. It is held that in cases where the
offences are not grave or heinous, and where the
parties have amicably settled the dispute, to secure the
ends of justice, the High Court may invoke its inherent
powers to quash the proceedings, particularly if
continuation of the prosecution would serve no fruitful
purpose.
7. On an overall consideration of the facts and
circumstances of the present case, and the materials on
record, I am satisfied that: the offences alleged are not
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:95307
heinous or of a serious nature; no public interest or
element of societal concern is involved; the chances of
conviction are remote in view of the settlement; and the
continuation of the proceedings would merely burden
the judicial process without advancing the cause of
justice. Furthermore, the settlement would promote
harmony between the parties and restore peace. Hence,
this Court is persuaded to hold that this is a fit case to
exercise its inherent jurisdiction.
In the result, the Crl. M.C. is allowed. Accordingly,
Annexure A1 FIR, Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime
No.62/2022 of the Marangattuppalli Police Station,
Kottayam, and all further proceedings in C.C.
No.214/2022 on the file of the Trial Court, as against
the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS,JUDGE
SCB/10.12.25.
CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025 7 2025:KER:95307
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 10786 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT (FIR) DATED 27.01.2022
ALONG WITH THE FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT
IN CRIME NO. 62/2022 OF MARANGATTUPPALLI
POLICE STATION IN KOTTAYAM DISTRICT
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
DATED 27.02.2022 IN CRIME NO. 62/2022 OF
MARANGATTUPPALLI POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT
Annexure A3 A ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT FURNISHED BY
THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 17.09.2025
