[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Raihan vs State Of Kerala on 7 April, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026 1
2026:KER:30778
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1948
CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026
CRIME NO.870/2025 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
IN CC NO.552 OF 2025 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I
MUVATTUPUZHA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 RAIHAN,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O MOIDUNNI PH, AMMANATH, KUMARANELLUR,
KUMARANELLUR TC, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680590
2 NAZEEM NIZAR,
AGED 24 YEARS
SHAMEERA MANZIL, CHIRAKKAL
PADINJATTUMUKKU,CHITTATUMUKKU
P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695301
BY ADVS.
SMT.RIZWANA A.A.
SMT.SHAIJIRA R.S.
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, PUZHAKKARAKKAVU ROAD,
THOTTUMKALPEEDIKA, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM, KERALA,
PIN - 686661
CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026 2
2026:KER:30778
3 RASHID PK,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O KONTHALAM PH, PARACKAL HOUSE, NEAR MUSLIM MOSQUE,
EAST MARADY KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM RURAL,
PIN - 686673
4 BILAL,
S/O ISMAIL, RESIDING AT KAVAT PEEDIKA HOUSE, NEAR
EAST MARADY MUSLIM MOSQUE, EAST MARADY KARAYIL,MARADY
VILLAGE ,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT ( IS IMPLEADED AS
ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO:4 VIDE ORDER DATED
18.03.2026 IN CRL.M.A. 1/2026 IN CRL.M.C. 2157/2026)
BY ADVS.
SHRI.AQIB SOHAIL P.S.
SMT.SAMUDRASANTHI M. D.
SRI.M.P.PRASANTH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.04.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026 3
2026:KER:30778
ORDER
Dated this the 07th day of April, 2026
The petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.552/2025
on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-
1, Muvattupuzha, which has arisen from Crime No.870/2025
registered by the Muvattupuzha Police Station, Ernakulam,
alleging the commission of the offences punishable under
Sections 296(b) and 118(1) read with Section 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
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 respondents 3 and 4,
who have executed Annexure-A4 and affidavit dated
10.03.2026, affirming the settlement.
CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026 4
2026:KER:30778
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, and the
learned Counsel for the respondents 3 and 4.
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 respondents 3
and 4 have no subsisting grievance and do not wish to
pursue the prosecution, and have no objection to the
proceedings being quashed.
5. The learned Senior 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
CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026 5
2026:KER:30778
laid down by 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], 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
CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026 6
2026:KER:30778
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-A2 First Information Report and Annexure-A3
Final Report in Crime No.870/2025 of the Muvattupuzha
Police Station, Ernakulam, and all further proceedings in
C.C.No.552/2025 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-1, Muvattupuzha, as against the
petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
NAB
CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026 7
2026:KER:30778
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 2157 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION
STATEMENT DATED 13.04.2025
ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
DATED 13.04.2025
ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
12.04.2025 FILED IN RELATION TO CRIME NO.
870/2025 OF MOOVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED
25.02.2026
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE R4(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT/CW2 DATED 10/03/2026
