[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Mr. Subin S vs State Of Kerala on 7 April, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 2590 OF 2026 1
2026:KER:30767
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. 2590 OF 2026
CRIME NO.647/2018 OF KADINAMKULAM POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
IN CC NO.1454 OF 2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -
I, ATTINGAL
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 MR. SUBIN S.
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O SHAHIDA AND RESIDENT OF SHIBU HOUSE,
PUTHENCURICHY, KADINAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695303
2 MR. MUHAMMED HARIS,
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O SHAJAHAN AND RESIDENT OF KANNETTIL HOUSE,
KANIYAPURAM P.O. KADINAMKULAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695301
3 MR. MOHAMMED SALMAN N.,
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O NASUMUDEEN K.P. AND RESIDENT OF SALMAN MANZIL,
KANIYAPURAM P.O., KADINAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695301
4 MR. SAID MUHAMMED S,
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O SHAREEF AND RESIDENT OF MANAKKATTUVILAKOM, NEAR
FCI, KAZHAKOOTAM P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695582
BY ADV SMT.A.DEEPTHI
CRL.MC NO. 2590 OF 2026 2
2026:KER:30767
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KADINAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL
POLICE DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 695303
3 SHAJEELA R SHIYAS,
W/O SHIYAS, AGED 45 YEARS, AND RESIDENT OF SHIYAS
MANZIL, CHITTATUMUKKU, KADINAMKULAM, KANIYAPURAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695301
BY ADVS.
SRI.NEBIL NIZAR
SHRI.ASEEM MOHAMED A.
SRI.C.S.HRTIHWIK, SENIOR 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. 2590 OF 2026 3
2026:KER:30767
ORDER
Dated this the 07th day of April, 2026
The petitioners are the accused in
C.C.No.1454/2018 on the file of the Court of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate-I, Attingal, which has arisen from
Crime No.647/2018 registered by the Kadinamkulam Police
Station, Thiruvananthapuram, alleging the commission of
the offences punishable under Sections 451, 427, 294(b)
and 506(i) read with Section 34 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 3rd
respondent, who has executed Annexure-A3 affidavit,
affirming the settlement.
CRL.MC NO. 2590 OF 2026 4
2026:KER:30767
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, and the
learned Counsel for the 3rd 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 3rd
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 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
2026:KER:30767
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
CRL.MC NO. 2590 OF 2026 6
2026:KER:30767
process without advancing the cause of justice.
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-A1 First Information Report and Annexure-A2
Final Report in Crime No.647/2018 of the Kadinamkulam
Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, and all further
proceedings in C.C.No.1454/2018 on the file of the Court of
the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Attingal, as against the
petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
NAB
2026:KER:30767
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 2590 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO.647/2018
DATED 17.06.2018 OF KADINAMKULAM POLICE
STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL POLICE
DISTRICT
ANNEXURE A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
DATED 25.06.2018
ANNEXURE A3 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT DATED 09.03.2026
