[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Reshmi Krishnan vs The State Of Kerala on 15 December, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:96399
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. 10777 OF 2025
CRIME NO.932/2024 OF Sooranadu Police Station, Kollam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.121 OF 2025 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - II, SASTHAMCOTTA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
RESHMI KRISHNAN,
AGED 32 YEARS
W/O MANU MOHAN, MANU BHAVAN,
SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE & P.O,
KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690520
BY ADVS.
SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN
SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
SRI.M.KIRANLAL
SRI.T.S.SARATH
SHRI.SAMEER M NAIR
SHRI.RAVISANKAR C.R.
SMT.SAILAKSHMI MENON
SMT. AASHI K. SHAJAN
SHRI.HAFEEZ MUHAMMED
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA ,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
SOORANADU POLICE STATION,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 690520
3 ANANTHAVALLY AMMA,
AGED 66 YEARS
W/O SANKARA PILLAI, THAZHATHIL VEEDU,
PARAKKADAVU P.O, PULIKKULAM,
SOORNADU NORTH VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK,
CRL.MC NO. 10777 OF 2025 2
2025:KER:96399
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690561
4 SARASAMMA,
AGED 61 YEARS
W/O SIVARAMA PILLAI, SARASWATHY BHAVAN,
PARAKKADAVU P.O, EDAPPANAYAM,
SOORNADU NORTH VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690561
5 RADHAMANI AMMA,
AGED 65 YEARS
W/O GOPALAKRISHNA,KURUP,
RESIDING AT KRISHNA BHAVANAM,
PARAKKADAVU P.O, EDAPPANAYAM,
SOORNADU NORTH VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690561
BY ADV SHRI.ANSU VARGHESE
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- 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:
CRL.MC NO. 10777 OF 2025 3
2025:KER:96399
Dated this the 15th day of December, 2025
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in C.C. No.121/2025 on
the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate-II, Sasthamcotta ('Trial Court', for short)
which has originated from Crime No. 932/2024
registered by the Sooranadu Police Station, Kollam
District, alleging the commission of the offences
punishable under Sections 406, 408 and 420 of the
Indian Penal Code.
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
respondents 3 to 5, who have executed Annexures A3 to
A5 affidavits, affirming the settlement.
CRL.MC NO. 10777 OF 2025 4
2025:KER:96399
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned counsel for the respondents 3 to 5.
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
party respondents have no subsisting grievance and do
not wish to pursue the prosecution, and have 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 the Hon'ble Supreme Court
CRL.MC NO. 10777 OF 2025 5
2025:KER:96399
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
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.
CRL.MC NO. 10777 OF 2025 6
2025:KER:96399
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. 932/2024 of the Sooranadu Police Station and all
further proceedings in C.C. No. 121/2025 of the Trial
Court, as against the petitioner, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk
CRL.MC NO. 10777 OF 2025 7
2025:KER:96399
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 10777 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.932/2024 OF SOORANADU POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DISTRICT
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.932/2024 OF SOORANADU POLICE
STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT
Annexure A3 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
23.05.2025 SWORN BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT
Annexure A4 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
20.05.2025 SWORN BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT/CW2
Annexure A5 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
20.05.2025 SWORN BY THE 5TH
RESPONDENT/CW3
