[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Mohammed Noufal R vs State Of Kerala on 6 April, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:30242
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1948
CRL.MC NO. 2483 OF 2026
CRIME NO.659/2022 OF Kalady Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.387 OF 2022
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - IV, PERUMBAVOOR
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 8:
1 MOHAMMED NOUFAL R,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O RASHEED KUNJU,VALIYAVILATHEKKATHIL,
KIDANGAYAM NADUVIL, SOORANADU SOUTH,
PATHARAM (P.O) KOLLAM DIST., PIN - 690522
2 BHARATH BABU,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O BABU M.P, MOOLAMKOMBIL HOUSE,
NAYATHODE (P.O), ANGAMALY,
ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 683572
3 YADHUNANDAN R,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O V. RAJESH, NISHA BHAVAN HOUSE,
ERANHOLY (P.O),THALASSERY,
KANNUR DIST., PIN - 670107
4 EDWIN SAJU,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O SAJU T.T ,THEKKEN HOUSE,
MALAYATTOOR (P.O), ILLITHODE,
ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 683587
5 RICHUS (HAROON),
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O HAMSA,MULLAPPILLI HOUSE,
EDANADU, CHOUWARA VILLAGE
ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 683571
CRL.MC NO.2483 of 2026 2
2026:KER:30242
6 VYSAKKUMAR E.V ,
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O VIJAYAKUMAR E.V, EMBLASSERY HOUSE,
SRIMOOLANAGARAM (P.O)
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683580
7 MUHAMMED SAJID,
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O SHAMSUDHEEN M.A
ELITE HOUSE, MULAVAN,
KOLLAM DIST, PIN - 691501
8 MUHAMMED IRFAN A.S,
AGED 22 YEARS
, S/O SHAJAHAN A.A,ALAMANA HOUSE, PUTHUVASSERY,
NEDUMBASSERY (P.O) ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 683585
BY ADV SHRI.JINO JOSE
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 ARUN SHAJI ,
AGED 29 YEARS, S/O SHAJI,
KOONAMPARAYIL HOUSE, POTTA, AYYAMPUZHA,
ERNAKULAM RURAL, PIN - 680722
BY ADV SMT.BIMALA BABY
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.SMT.SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.04.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO.2483 of 2026 3
2026:KER:30242
Dated this the 6th day of April, 2026
ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 8 in C.C.No.
387/2022 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-IV, Perumbavoor ('Trial Court', for
short), which has originated from Crime No. 659/2022
registered by the Kalady Police Station, Ernakulam
District, alleging the commission of the offences
punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324
and 326 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The petitioners have 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 petitioners and the
second respondent, who has executed Annexure 3
affidavit, affirming the settlement.
CRL.MC NO.2483 of 2026 4
2026:KER:30242
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 disputes amicably. The
party respondent has no subsisting grievance and does
not wish to pursue the prosecution, and has 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 the Hon'ble Supreme Court
CRL.MC NO.2483 of 2026 5
2026:KER:30242
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 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.
CRL.MC NO.2483 of 2026 6
2026:KER:30242
Furthermore, the settlement would promote harmony
between the parties and restore peace. Hence, this Court
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 1 FIR, Annexure 2 Final Report in
Crime No.659/2022 of the Kalady Police Station and all
further proceedings in C.C. No.387/2022 of the Trial
Court, as against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk
CRL.MC NO.2483 of 2026 7
2026:KER:30242
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 2483 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
659/2022 OF KALADY POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM RURAL DATED 24.06.2022
Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC
NO. 387/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF
THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT
IV, PERUMBAVOOR DATED 31.08.2022
Annexure 3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE RESPONDENT/
DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 06.03.2026
