[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Induchoodan vs State Of Kerala on 8 April, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 2954 OF 2026
1
2026:KER:31486
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1948
CRL.MC NO. 2954 OF 2026
CRIME NO.756/2024 OF Kottayam East Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.176 OF 2025 OF
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,KOTTAYAM
PETITIONER/S:
INDUCHOODAN,
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O SATHEESH BABU, SUDHEENDRA NILAYAM (KAVYADHRA),
PERROOR P.O, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686637
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.A.VINOD
SHRI.SUHAIL M.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
KOTTAYAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686002
3 SANEESH K M,
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O MANI K.P, KARUPURATH, NEAR CHEMPERI, AREEKAMALA,
ERUVASSERY, CHEMPERI, KANNUR, PIN - 670632
BY ADV SHRI.AKSHAY JOY
CRL.MC NO. 2954 OF 2026
2
2026:KER:31486
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.SMT.SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.04.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 2954 OF 2026
3
2026:KER:31486
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 2954 OF 2026
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2026
ORDER
The petitioner is the 2nd accused in CC No.176/2025
on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Kottayam, which has originated from Crime No.756/2024
registered by the Kottayam East Police Station, Kottayam,
alleging the commission of the offences punishable under
Sections 417, 418 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 filing of the complaint has been amicably settled
between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, who has
executed Annexure-A3 affidavit, affirming the settlement.
CRL.MC NO. 2954 OF 2026
2026:KER:31486
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the learned
Counsel for the 3rd respondent.
4. The learned counsel on either side submit 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 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. 2954 OF 2026
2026:KER:31486
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
CRL.MC NO. 2954 OF 2026
2026:KER:31486
judicial 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 FIR, Annexure-A2 Final Report and all
further proceedings in CC No.176/2025 on the file of the
Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kottayam, as
against the petitioner, are hereby quashed.
sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rkc
CRL.MC NO. 2954 OF 2026
2026:KER:31486
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 2954 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A-1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT IN CRIME NO 756/2024 OF KOTTAYAM EAST
POLICE STATION DATED 11.06.2024 ALONG WITH
FIS
Annexure A-2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CC NO
176/2025 DATED 17.11.2025 PENDING ON THE
FILES OF HON'BLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
COURT, KOTTAYAM
Annexure A-3 ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE
RESPONDENT NO 3 DATED 26.03.2026
Annexure A-4 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT DATED
25.03.2026 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE
PETITIONER'S FATHER AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT
