Kerala High Court
Beldans @ Baby vs State Of Kerala on 30 October, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:81607
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 8TH KARTHIKA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 9079 OF 2025
CRIME NO.276/2019 OF Kodanad Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.364 OF 2019
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - III, PERUMBAVOOR
PETITIONER/SECOND ACCUSED:
BELDANS @ BABY
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O. RAPHAEL, ARAKKAL HOUSE,
NEAR ST. BERNARD CHURCH, CHELLANAM,
CHELLANAM KARA, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 682008
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS
SRI.JOEMON ANTONY
SHRI.ANTONY NILTON REMELO
SMT.ANJANA P.V.
SRI.RENISH RAVEENDRAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 RENJANA RAPHEAL
AGED 33 YEARS
D/O. RAPHAEL, PALLIKKARAKKARAN HOUSE,
AAYTAHUPADY, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 683544
CRL.MC NO.9079 OF 2025 2
2025:KER:81607
3 JELOSY RAPHEAL
AGED 69 YEARS
W/O. LATE RAPHAEL, PALLIKKARAKKARAN HOUSE,
AIMURY, KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 683544
4 ELIAS MATHEW
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. PAILY, POTHANAD HOUSE,
PUTTUMANOOR BHAGOM, PUTHENCRUIZ,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 682308
5 ROY MATHEW
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O. MATHAI, THOTTAPPURATH HOUSE,
CHIRAPPADY BHAGOM, KOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 686673
BY ADV SHRI.JOSEPH M.S.
OTHER PRESENT:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- SRI.M.P.PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO.9079 OF 2025 3
2025:KER:81607
Dated this the 30th day of October, 2025
ORDER
The petitioner is the second accused in L.P.No.
4/2023 on the file of the Court of the judicial First Class
Magistrate-III, Perumbavoor, which has arisen from
Crime No. 276/2019, registered by the Kodanad Police
Station, alleging the commission of the offences
punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The petitioner has invoked the inherent
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash all
further proceedings in the above case. It is asserted that
the dispute that led to the registration of the crime has
been amicably settled between the petitioner and the
respondents 2 to 5, who have executed Annexures A3 to
A6 affidavits, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for
2025:KER:81607
the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned Counsel for the respondents 2 to 5.
4. The learned counsel on either side submits that,
with the intervention of relatives and well-wishers, the
parties have resolved their disputes amicably. The party
respondents have no subsisting grievance and do not
wish to pursue the prosecution, and have no objection to
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 genuine and bona fide
settlement. The State has no objection to the Criminal
Miscellaneous case being allowed.
6. The scope and ambit of the inherent powers of this
Court to quash criminal proceedings on the ground of
settlement between the parties have been authoritatively
laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Gian Singh v.
State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303], State of Madhya
2025:KER:81607
Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC
688], Naushey Ali v. State of U.P. [(2025) 4 SCC 78],
and in a host of judicial pronouncements. It is held that
in cases where the offences are not grave or heinous,
and where the parties have amicably settled the dispute,
to secure the ends of justice, the High Court may invoke
its inherent powers to quash the proceedings,
particularly if continuation of the prosecution would
serve no fruitful purpose.
7. On an overall consideration of the facts and
circumstances of the present case, and the materials on
record, I am satisfied that: the offences alleged are not
heinous or of a serious nature; no public interest or
element of societal concern is involved; 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:81607
is persuaded to hold that this is a fit case to exercise its
inherent jurisdiction.
In the result, the Crl. M.C. is allowed. Accordingly,
Annexure A1 FIR, Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime
No. 276/2019 of the Kodanad Police Station and all
further proceedings in L.P.No. 04/2023 on the file of the
Court of the judicial First Class Magistrate-III,
Perumbavoor, as against the petitioner, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk/ 30.10.25
2025:KER:81607
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR AND FIS IN
CRIME NO. 276/2019 OF KODANAD POLICE
STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT DATED
17/04/2019
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
DATED 26/08/2019 IN CC NO. 364/2019 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT
PERUMBAVOOR III
Annexure A3 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27-09-2025
Annexure A4 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 27-09-2025
Annexure A5 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 27-09-2025
Annexure A6 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY
THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 27-09-2025
