Kerala High Court
Shijin vs State Of Kerala on 28 October, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:80813
CRL.MC NO. 9046 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 9046 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1281/2017 OF Varkala Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.1487 OF 2018
OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,ATTINGAL
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:
1 .SHIJIN,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O.SHAJAHAN, , RESIDING AT RAFEEQ MANZIL,
KULAMUTTOM, MANAMBOOR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT-, PIN - 695611
2 SHEMEER,
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.ABDUL HAQ,S RESDING AT LAKSHAM VEEDU (SHEMEER
MANZIL), KULAMUTTOM, MANAMBOOR.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-, PIN - 695611
BY ADV SHRI.UNNIKRISHNAN R.
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & CW2:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-, PIN - 682031
2025:KER:80813
CRL.MC NO. 9046 OF 2025
2
2 RINU,
S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 41 YEARS RESIDING AT
CHARUVILA VEEDU, NEAR GURU NAGAR, MANAMBOOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-, PIN - 695611
BY ADV SRI.AKHIL SUSEENDRAN
OTHER PRESENT:
PP.SRI.M.P.PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:80813
CRL.MC NO. 9046 OF 2025
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 9046 OF 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of October, 2025
ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in
S.C.No.1487 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the
Assistant Sessions Judge, Attingal, which arises out of
Crime No.1281 of 2017 registered by the Varkala Police
Station, Thiruvananthapuram, as against the accused
persons for allegedly committing the offences
punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 308
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 (BNSS, in short), to quash Annexure A Final Report
and all further proceedings in the above crime. It is
averred in the criminal miscellaneous case that the
2025:KER:80813
CRL.MC NO. 9046 OF 2025
dispute that led to the registration of the crime has been
amicably settled between the petitioners and the 2 nd
respondent (victim), who has affirmed Annexure B
affidavit, vouching for the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned Counsel for the 2nd 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 party respondent has voluntarily executed the
2025:KER:80813
CRL.MC NO. 9046 OF 2025
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], 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
2025:KER:80813
CRL.MC NO. 9046 OF 2025
mental depravity; no public interest or element of
societal concern is involved; the petitioners do not have
criminal antecedents; the party 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 finds this is a fit case to exercise its inherent
jurisdiction.
In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed. Accordingly,
Annexure A Final Report and all further proceedings in
S.C.No.1487 of 2018 on the file of the above court, as
against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
dkr
2025:KER:80813
CRL.MC NO. 9046 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO. 1281 / 2017 OF VARKALA POLICE
STATION REGISTERED U/S.294(B), 323, 324,
308 R/W.34 IPC, PENDING AS SC
NO.1487/2018 BEFORE THE FILES OF
ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, ATTINGAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Annexure B THE AFFIDAVIT OF COMPROMISE OF
