[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Muhammed Riyas K vs State Of Kerala on 17 December, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:97198
CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA,
1947
CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
CRIME NO.394/2023 OF Kondotty Police Station, Malappuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.246 OF 2024
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,MALAPPURAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
1 MUHAMMED RIYAS K,
AGED 29 YEARS
KADANNALIL HOUSE, MADANIKUZHI, ANDIYOORKUNNU,
PULIKKAL,P.O. ANDIYOORKUNNU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN - 673637
2 SHAJAHAN,
AGED 25 YEARS
KANNAM PARAMBATH, CUNGAM, FEOKE P.O., FEROKE S.O.,
KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN - 673631
3 ABOOBACKER SIDEEQUE PT,
S/O MUHAMMED PT, POTTAMMAL THAZAHATH,
KULANGARAPDAM, THUMBAPPADAM, FEROOK COLLEGE P.O.,
RAMANATTUKARA, FAROOK COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673632
4 MUHAMMED MUNEESH,
AGED 27 YEARS
P.C. MANZIL, MELODI NILAYAM, KAHUVANTHURUTHI P.O.,
VTC FEROKE S.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673631
BY ADVS.
2025:KER:97198
CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
2
SMT.IPSITA OJAL
SHRI.MANAS P HAMEED
SMT.LAYA SIMON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KONDOTTY POLICE STATION, KONDOTTY POST, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 673638
3 MOHAMMED SHIBIL,
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O HAMSA KALANGADAN, VAYALIL HOUSE, NEDIYIRUPP
P.O., MUSLIYARANGADI, KONDOTTY TALUK, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, KERALA, INDIA, PIN - 673638
BY ADV SHRI.HYDERALI N.K.
SR.PP. SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:97198
CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
3
ORDER
Dated this the 17th day of December, 2025
The petitioners are the accused in
S.C.No.246/2024 on the file of the Assistant Sessions
Court, Manjeri (Trial Court), which has originated from
Crime No.394/2023 registered by the Kondotty Police
Station, Malappuram filed before the Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court, Malappuram, for allegedly committing
the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 452,
308 and 201 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 the
third respondent, who has executed Annexure A3
affidavit, affirming the settlement.
2025:KER:97198
CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned Counsel for the third 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 third
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.
2025:KER:97198
CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
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.
2025:KER:97198
CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
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 1 FIR, Annexure 2 final report and all further
proceedings in S.C No. 246/2024 of the Trial Court, as
against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm17/12/2025
2025:KER:97198
CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 10356 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 11.04.2023
IN CRIME NO. 394 OF 2023 REGISTERED AT
KONDOTTY POLICE STATION
Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED
BY THE KONDOTTY POLICE BEFORE THE HON'BLE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,
MALAPPURAM, IN CRIME NO. 394 OF 2023 IN
SC 246 OF 2024
Annexure A3 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT DATED 28-10-2025
FURNISHED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/ DE-FACTO
COMPLAINANT
