[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Kunjayamutty vs State Of Kerala on 2 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:8416
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 13TH MAGHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 177 OF 2026
CRIME NO.551/2023 OF Perinthalmanna Police Station, Malappuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.517 OF 2023 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, PERINTHALMANNA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3:
1 KUNJAYAMUTTY,
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED, KULANGARA HOUSE,
VENGUR, PERINTHALMANNA VIA,
KEEZHATTURE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
KOZHIKODE-, PIN - 679325
2 MUHAMMED RASHIQ,
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED RASHEEED,
THAMARATH HOUSE POOPALAM,
PERINTHALMANNA,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679503
3 MUHAMMED NISHAD,
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O. KUNJAYAMUTTY, KULANGARA HOUSE,
VENGUR, PERINTHALMANNA VIA, KEEZHATTURE,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679325
BY ADVS.
SRI.SHAHIM BIN AZIZ
SRI.T.RIYAS
SHRI.RAFEEK. V.K.
SMT.O.A.NURIYA
SHRI.ABDUL RAHOOF P.M.
SHRI.K C MOHAMED RASHID
SMT.FARSANA A.S.
CRL.MC NO.177 of 2026 2
2026:KER:8416
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,, PIN - 682031
2 VIMAL SADASIVAN,
AGED 44 YEARS
S/O SADASIVAN, VIMAL HOUSE,
PATHUKUDI, MANNARKKAD,
PALAKKAD-, PIN - 678582
3 VIPIN K,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O. BALAN, KALATHIL HOUSE,
PAYYANADAM PO, MANNARKKAD,
PALAKKAD,, PIN - 678583
BY ADV SHRI.MOHAMMED SHAFI.K
OTHER PRESENT:
SR PP SRI C S HRITHWIK
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO.177 of 2026 3
2026:KER:8416
Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2025
ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in C.C. No.
517/2023 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-I, Perinthalmanna ('Trial Court', for
short), which has originated from Crime No. 551/2023
registered by the Perinthalmanna Police Station,
Malappuram District, alleging the commission of the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 294(b),
427, 452 and 506(ii) 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
respondents 2 and 3, who have executed Annexures A3
CRL.MC NO.177 of 2026 4
2026:KER:8416
and A4 affidavits, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3.
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 respondents have no subsisting grievance and do
not wish to pursue the prosecution and have 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
CRL.MC NO.177 of 2026 5
2026:KER:8416
authoritatively laid down by 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 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.177 of 2026 6
2026:KER:8416
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
in Crime No. 551/2023 of the Perinthalmanna Police
Station and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 517/2023
of the Trial Court, as against the petitioners, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk
CRL.MC NO.177 of 2026 7
2026:KER:8416
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 177 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R NO.
551/2023 DATED 09.04.2023 OF
PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL CHARGE IN CC:
NO. 517/2023 ON THE FILES OF THE LEARNED
JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-1
PERINTHALMANNA
Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT AFFIDAVIT OF
THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 29.04.2025
Annexure A4 THE TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT AFFIDAVIT OF
THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29.04.2025
