Kerala High Court
Krishnadas K.R vs State Of Kerala on 22 October, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2025:KER:78438
CRL.MC NO. 7636 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 30TH ASWINA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 7636 OF 2025
CRIME NO.200/2025 OF Mankara Police Station, Palakkad
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.529 OF 2025 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,PALAKKAD
PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4:
1 KRISHNADAS K.R,
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.RAJAN, KIZHAKKEKKARA HOUSE, NAGARIPURAM P.O,
PERADIKUNNU, MANNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN -
678642
2 NIKHILDAS,
AGED 34 YEARS
VALLEKUNNATH, NAGARIPURAM P.O, PERADIKUNNU, MANNUR,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 678642
3 NIDHIN DAS V.H,
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O.HARIDASAN, VALAYAMKUNNU HOUSE,NAGARIPPURAM,
MANNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 678642
4 BAIJU A.U,
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN A, ATHIKKAPARAMBIL, NAGARIPURAM
P.O, PERADIKUNNU, MANNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN -
678642
BY ADV SRI.NIREESH MATHEW
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
2025:KER:78438
CRL.MC NO. 7636 OF 2025
2
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI., PIN - 682031
2 RATHEESH P.R,
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O.RAMANUNNI, PUNCHIRI HOUSE, NAGARIPURAM P.O,
MANNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678642
BY ADV SHRI.ATHUL POULOSE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.P. PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:78438
CRL.MC NO. 7636 OF 2025
3
ORDER
Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2025
The petitioners are the accused 1 to 4 in C.C
No.529/2025 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-II, Palakkad, which arises out of Crime
No. 200/2025 registered by the Mankara Police Station,
Palakkad, for allegedly committing the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2) and 117(2) r/w Section 3(5)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
2. The petitioners have approached this Court under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023, to quash Annexure 1 FIR, Annexure 2 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
(injured), who has affirmed Annexure 3 affidavit, vouching
for the settlement.
2025:KER:78438
CRL.MC NO. 7636 OF 2025
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 second
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
2025:KER:78438
CRL.MC NO. 7636 OF 2025
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 mental
depravity; no public interest or element of societal concern
is involved; the petitioners do not have criminal
antecedents; 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
2025:KER:78438
CRL.MC NO. 7636 OF 2025
settlement would promote harmony between the parties
and restore peace. Hence, this Court finds this as a fit case
to exercise its inherent jurisdiction.
In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed. Accordingly,
Annexure 1 FIR, Annexure 2 Final Report in Crime No.
200/2025 of the Mankara Police Station and all further
proceedings in C.C. No. 529/2025 on the file of the Judicial
First-Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad, as against the
petitioners, are hereby quashed.
SD/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm22/10/2025
2025:KER:78438
CRL.MC NO. 7636 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.200/2025 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT DATED 27.03.2025 ALONG
WITH F.I. STATEMENT
Annexure 2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.200/2025 OF MANKARA POLICE
STATION DATED 25.05.2025
Annexure 3 ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23.07.2025
