Kerala High Court
Thasleema vs State Of Kerala on 28 October, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:80849
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. 8925 OF 2025
CRIME NO.99/2020 OF Koduvally Police Station, Kozhikode
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.301 OF 2024
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,THAMARASSERY
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS 1 TO 4:
1 THASLEEMA
AGED 40 YEARS
D/O CHEERATTA UNNIMOYI,
PAYINGOTT POYILIL, KARUVANPOYIL,
KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673572
2 SAIFUDHEEN M.P
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED, PAYINGOTT POYILIL,
KARUVANPOYIL, KODUVALLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673572
3 FASIL
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED, PAYINGOTT POYILIL,
KARUVANPOYIL, KODUVALLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673572
4 ABDUL NAZEER P.M
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O MAMMED KOYA, PAYINGOTT POYILIL,
KARUVANPOYIL, KODUVALLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673572
BY ADV SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN
CRL.MC NO. 8925 OF 2025 2
2025:KER:80849
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 ABDUL LATHEEF
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O MOIDEENKUTTY, IDIYARAKUNNUMMAL,
KEDAYATHUR, PUTHUR, KODUVALLY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673572
BY ADV SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV
OTHER PRESENT:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- 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:
CRL.MC NO. 8925 OF 2025 3
2025:KER:80849
Dated this the 28th day of October, 2025
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in C.C.
No. 301/2024 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-I, Thamarassery, which arises out of
Crime No. 99/2020 registered by the Koduvally Police
Station, Kozhikode District, as against the accused
persons for allegedly committing the offences punishable
under Sections 420, 468 and 471 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-I FIR, Annexure-II Final Report
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 has affirmed Annexure-IV
affidavit, vouching for the settlement.
2025:KER:80849
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:80849
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 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
2025:KER:80849
finds this as a fit case to exercise its inherent
jurisdiction.
In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed. Accordingly,
Annexure-I FIR, Annexure-II Final Report in Crime No.
99/2020 of the Koduvally Police Station and all further
proceedings in C.C. No. 301/2024 on the file of the Court
of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thamarassery, as
against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS,JUDGE
mtk/28.10.25
2025:KER:80849
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT DATED 27-01-2020 IN CRIME NO.99 OF
2020 OF THE KODUVALLY POLICE STATION,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
Annexure-II CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO. 99/2020 OF THE KODUVALLY POLICE
STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT DATED 10-07-
Annexure-III A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE
IN CRIME NO.99 OF 2020 OF THE KODUVALLY
POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
Annexure-IV AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 05-10-2025
