[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
C.K.George vs State Of Kerala on 15 December, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:96506
CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1693/2024 OF Kottarakkara Police Station, Kollam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.964 OF 2024 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOTTARAKKARA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
C.K.GEORGE,
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O LATE M.KUNJUKUNJU,CHARUVILA VEEDU, PALACE LAND
PULAMON P.O. KOTTARAKARA,KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN -
691531
BY ADVS.
SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF
SMT.MOLLY JACOB
SRI.SHOUKATH HUSAIN
SMT.AKHEELA FARZANA
SHRI.JIKKU GEORGE JACOB
SMT.ASHIFA YOUSEFF
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031
2 DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CRIME BRANCH
(KOLLAM RURAL)
KOTTARAKARA POLICE STATION, KOTTARAKARA P.O, KOLLAM,
2025:KER:96506
CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
2
PIN - 691531
3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KOTTARAKARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691531
4 HARIKRISHNAN,
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O GOPALAKRISHNAN ,UNNIKRISHNAN
BHAVANOM,NEELESWARAM,KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 691505
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SHAJI THANKAPPAN
SHRI.AMAL BABY
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:96506
CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
3
ORDER
Dated this the 15th day of December, 2025
The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.964/2024
on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate-I, Kottarakkara (Trial Court), which has arisen
from Crime No.1693/2024 registered by the Kottarakara
Police Station, Kollam alleging the commission of the
offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 296(b), 115(2)
and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. The petitioner has 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 petitioner and the fourth respondent, who has
executed Annexure 6 affidavit, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the learned
2025:KER:96506
CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
Counsel for the fourth 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 fourth
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
parties have arrived at a genuine and bona fide settlement.
The State has no objection to the Criminal Miscellaneous
case being allowed.
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],
2025:KER:96506
CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
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
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
2025:KER:96506
CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
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 1 FIR, Annexure 3 final report and all further
proceedings in C.C. No. 964/2024 of the Trial Court, as
against the petitioner, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm15/12/2025
2025:KER:96506
CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 10986 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
1693/2024 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO 1695/2024 DATED
11.8.2024
Annexure 3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO.
1693/2024 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT - I, KOTTARAKKARA DATED
03.10.2024
Annexure 4 TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO. 1695/2024 BEFORE
THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT
- I, KOTTARAKKARA DATED 25.10.2024
Annexure 5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED
17.06.2025 IN W.P.(CRL.) NO. 746/2025
BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT
Annexure 6 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 27-
11-2025
