Kerala High Court
Muhammed Ashar vs State Of Kerala on 24 October, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:79415
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. 8285 OF 2025
CRIME NO.3032/2018 OF ALUVA EAST POLICE STATION, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.39 OF 2019 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, ALUVA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 3:
1 MUHAMMED ASHAR
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O SAVAD P.H, PULLATH HOUSE,
EAST VELLIYATHUNADU, UC COLLEGE P.O,
ALUVA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683102
2 JACOB JOHN
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O JOHN JACOB, CHENNILATH HOUSE,
ONNAMILE, IRINGOLE P.O, PERUMBAVOOR,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683548
3 ROSHAN
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O BINURAJ, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
MANAKODAM, CHENDAMANAGALAM P.O,
NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683512
BY ADV SHRI.RAMEEZ M. AZEEZ
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 ALEX THANKACHAN
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O THANKACHAN, CHAKKASSERY HOUSE,
Crl. M.C. No. 8285 of 2025 -:2:-
2025:KER:79415
NEAR MALAYATTOOR ST. THOMAS CHURCH,
MALAYATTOOR P.O, NEELISWARAM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683587
BY ADV SHRI.JISSMON A KURIAKOSE
OTHER PRESENT:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- SRI M P PRASANTH
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. 8285 of 2025 -:3:-
2025:KER:79415
Dated this the 24th day of October, 2025
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 3 in C.C.
No. 39/2019 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-1, Aluva, which arises out of Crime No.
3032/2018 registered by the Aluva East Police Station,
Ernakulam District, as against the accused persons for
allegedly committing the offences punishable under
Sections 341, 323 and 324 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-1 Final Report, Annexure-2 FIR
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-4
affidavit, vouching for the settlement.
2025:KER:79415
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:79415
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:79415
finds this as a fit case to exercise its inherent
jurisdiction.
In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed. Accordingly,
Annexure-1 Final Report, Annexure-2 FIR in Crime No.
3032/2018 of the Aluva East Police Station and all
further proceedings in C.C. No.39/2019 on the file of the
Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva, as
against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS,JUDGE
mtk/24.10.25
2025:KER:79415
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CC NO.39/2019 OF JFCM-1, ALUVA DATED
08/01/2019
Annexure 2 A COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.3032/2018
OF ALUVA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT DATED 30/10/2018
Annexure 3 A COPY OF THE FIS IN CRIME NO.3032/2018
OF ALUVA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT DATED 30/10/2018
Annexure 4 AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 23/08/2025
