Kerala High Court
Adhil Rahman vs State Of Kerala on 24 October, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:79355
1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 2ND KARTHIKA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 8713 OF 2025
CRIME NO.241/2021 OF Thalassery Police Station, Kannur
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.88 OF 2023 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,THALASSERY
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1,2,7 TO 10:
1 ADHIL RAHMAN,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O ABDUL RAHMAN,HAMAD HOUSE,
LABHA MASJID, NEERCHAL,
KANNUR, PIN - 670003
2 JAMSHEER P V,
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O ABOOBACKER,SALIYATH MANZIL HOUSE,
PAREEKADAV ROAD, MEETHALEPEEDIKA,
DHARMADAM, KANNUR, PIN - 670106
3 SAFAR MAVILAKKANDY,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O KAMARUDHEEN,MAVILAKANDY HOUSE,
SADULIPPALLI, KAKKAD, KANNUR, PIN - 670005
4 YASAR ARAFATH,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O SHUKOOR, RUBEENAS HOUSE,
SADULIPPALLI, KOTTALI, KANNUR, PIN - 670005
5 NAMEER M A ALIAS NAYEEM,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O ABDUL MUNEER,M A HOUSE,
KOTTAKUNNU, KATAMPALLY,
KANNUR, PIN - 670011
Crl. M.C. No.8713 of 2025 -:2:-
2025:KER:79355
6 SHANAVAS K P,
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED K P, SHA NIVAS HOUSE,
ERANHOLI, PALAM ROAD, KOMATHPARA,
UMMENCHIRA P O, KANNUR, PIN - 670649
BY ADVS.
SHRI.AMEER SALIM
SRI. AMIR SUHAIL PB
SMT.NESILI NAZEER
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 MUHAMMED ASIF,
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O ABDULLA, SARA MANZIL HOUSE,
J T ROAD, THIRUVANGOD AMSOM, SAIDARPALLY P O,
THELLICHERY, KANNUR, NOW RESIDING AT,
HAJATHY BUILDING NO. 08219,
AL MAHJAR DISTRICT, JEDDAH,
SAUDI ARABIA, PIN - 22424
BY ADV SHRI.ROY ANTONY
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- SMT SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 24.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl. M.C. No.8713 of 2025 -:3:-
2025:KER:79355
Dated this the 24th day of October, 2025
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1, 2 and 7 to 10
in C.C. No. 88/2023 on the file of the Court of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate, Thalassery, which arises out of
Crime No. 241/2021 registered by the Thalassery Police
Station, Kannur District, as against the accused persons
for allegedly committing the offences punishable under
Sections 342, 323, 324, 506 and 365 read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The petitioners have approached this Court under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023, to quash Annexure A FIR, Annexure B Charge
Sheet and all further proceedings in the above crime. It
is averred in the criminal miscellaneous case that the
dispute that led to the registration of the crime has been
amicably settled between the petitioners and the second
respondent (victim), who have affirmed Annexure C
affidavit, vouching for the settlement.
2025:KER:79355
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned Counsel for the second respondent.
4. The learned counsel on either side submits that,
with the intervention of relatives and well-wishers, the
parties have resolved their differences amicably. The
party respondent is no longer desirous of pursuing the
prosecution and has no objection in 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 bona fide settlement and
the second respondent has voluntarily executed the
affidavit. The State has no objection to the Crl.M.C.
being allowed.
6. The 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],
2025:KER:79355
and in a catena of decisions, has authoritatively held that
in cases where the offences are not grave or heinous,
involving mental depravity, and where the parties have
amicably settled the dispute, the High Court, to secure
the ends of justice, may invoke its inherent powers to
quash the proceedings, particularly if continuation of the
prosecution would serve no fruitful purpose.
7. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances
of the present case, I am satisfied that: the offences
alleged are not heinous or of a serious nature, involving
mental depravity; no public interest or element of
societal concern is involved; the petitioners do not have
criminal antecedents; the the second respondent has
voluntarily executed the affidavit; 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:79355
finds this as a fit case to exercise its inherent
jurisdiction.
In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed. Accordingly,
Annexure A FIR, Annexure B Charge Sheet in Crime No.
241/2021 of the Thalassery Police Station and all further
proceedings in C.C No.88/2023 on the file of the Court of
the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thalassery, as against
the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS,JUDGE
mtk/24.10.25
2025:KER:79355
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F I R NO. 241/2021
DATED 29.05.2021 IN CRIME NO. 241/2021 OF
THELLICHERRY POLICE STATION, KANNUR
DISTRICT
Annexure B CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET NO.
727 OF 2022 DATED 03/10/2022 IN CRIME NO.
241/2021 OF THELLICHERRY POLICE STATION,
KANNUR DISTRICT
Annexure C ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22.07.2025
