Kerala High Court
Vijayan vs State Of Kerala on 29 October, 2025
2025:KER:81124
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 9452 OF 2024
CRIME NO.453/2022 OF VAZHAKULAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.982 OF 2022 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT (VIOLENCE AGAINST
WOMEN & CHILDREN), ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
VIJAYAN
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O KUNJAPPAN , KOOTTATHEL HOUSE, MADAKKATHANAM
P.O.,KAPPU KARA, MANJALLOOR VILLAGE , MUVATTUPUZHA
TALUK , ERNAKULAM DISTRICT ., PIN - 686670
BY ADVS.
SHRI.P.V.ELIAS
SRI.N.N.ELAYATH
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031
2 SANESH K.K.
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O KRISHNANKUTTY,KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
KARIMKUNNAM VILLAGE, KARIMKUNNAM KARA , IDUKKI
DISTRICT NOW RESIDING AT SHEELA BHAVAN HOUSE,
EDAKKATTUKAYATTAMBHAGAM, KAAPPU KARA, MANJALLOOR
VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686670
2025:KER:81124
CRL.M.C.NO.9452 OF 2024
2
3 RAJAMMA
AGED 53 YEARS
W/O KRISHNANKUTTY, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,
KARIMKUNNAM VILLAGE, KARIMKUNNAM KARA, LDUKKI
DISTRICT., PIN - 685586
4 INDU
AGED 33 YEARS
W/O MANEESH M.K., PURAKKANDI HOUSE, THODUPUZHA
VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK , IDUKKI DISTRICT ., PIN
- 686669
BY ADV SRI.S.UNNIKRISHNAN (NELLAD)
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP-SRI.A.VIPIN NARAYAN
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 29.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:81124
CRL.M.C.NO.9452 OF 2024
3
ORDER
Dated this the 29th day of October, 2025
This is a petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., by the
accused in Crime No.453/2022 of Vazhakulam Police Station, which is
pending as SC. No.982/2022 on the file of Additional District Court and
Sessions Court (Violence against Women and Children), Ernakulam.
The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections
341, 323, 324, 294(b), 354-A, 308 of IPC.
2. The prosecution case is that, due to the enmity of the accused
towards CW1, he with the intention to manhandle him wrongfully
restrained him abused him in filthy language and voluntarily caused hurt
to him and attempted to do away with him. It is also alleged that, when
CW2 and CW3 tried to save CW1, the accused caused hurt to CW2 and
CW3 also and thereby he alleged to have committed the aforesaid
offences.
3. According to the petitioner, the dispute has been settled with the
defacto complainant/victims/respondent Nos.2 to 4 and they agreed to
drop all further proceedings relating to the above dispute. Therefore, the
2025:KER:81124
CRL.M.C.NO.9452 OF 2024
petitioner prayed for quashing all further proceedings against him.
4. The Defacto complainant and other victims filed affidavits
endorsing the averments in the Criminal MC. According to them, the
case has been amicably settled and that they do not intend to proceed
with the case and also that further proceedings in the case can be
quashed. They have no further grievance against the petitioner.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor, after getting instruction from the
investigating officer also submitted that the dispute has been settled
between the parties and that the victim is not at all interested in
continuing the prosecution against the petitioner.
6. It is true that the offences involved in this case include
Section 308 IPC. But still it has to be stated that when the crime is the
offshoot of private issues between the parties, and they have resolved the
issues amicably, the quashment of proceedings could be resorted to
maintain harmonious relationship between the parties. The proposition
of law in the above regard has been laid down by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in Yogendra Yadav v. State of Jharkhand [(2014) 9 SCC 653],
wherein it has been held that when quashing of proceedings on account
2025:KER:81124
CRL.M.C.NO.9452 OF 2024
of compromise would bring about peace, and would secure ends of
justice, High Court should not hesitate to quash them.
7. It appears that the issue involved in this case is purely
private in nature. As the matter has been amicably settled between the
parties, and the defacto complainants are not at all interested in
continuing the prosecution, there is no purpose to be fulfilled by the
continuance of the prosecution in this case. Therefore, this is a fit case in
which further proceedings can be quashed by invoking the inherent
power of this court. Such a course is also required to maintain the
harmonious relationship between the parties and also to prevent abuse of
process of the court.
In the result, This Crl. M.C is allowed. All further
proceedings against the petitioner in SC. No.982/2022 on the file of
Additional District Court and Sessions Court (Violence against Women
and Children), Ernakulam, arising from Crime No.453/2022 of
Vazhakulam Police Station, stands quashed.
Sd/-
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR,
Pvv JUDGE
2025:KER:81124
CRL.M.C.NO.9452 OF 2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
IN CRIME NO. 453/2022 OF VAZHAKULAM
POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM
ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.453/2022 VAZHAKULAM POLICE
STATION ,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
04.11.2024 SWORN IN BY THE SECOND
RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT WITNESS NO.1
ANNEXURE 4 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 04.11.2024 SWORN IN
BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT
WITNESS NO.2
ANNEXURE 5 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 05.11.2024 SWORN IN
BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT
WITNESS NO.3
