[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Muhammed Anis vs State Of Kerala on 2 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
Crl. M.C No.10599 of 2025
2026:KER:8847
1
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. 10599 OF 2025
CRIME NO.8/2021 OF CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION, KOCHI CITY,
Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.60 OF 2022 OF CHIEF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/S:
MUHAMMED ANIS ,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O HAMEED, RESIDING AT THAQVA HOUSE,
CHENGOTTUKAVU P.O ,MELUR,KOYILANDY
TALUK,KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673303
BY ADV SHRI.MUHAMMED SWADIQ
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 ANISH MOHAN,
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O GOPALAKRISHNAN MOHANAN,RESIDING AT
DHANYA,KINASSERY ,KANNADI P.O, PALAKKAD, PIN -
678701
BY ADV SHRI.SUMEEN S.
Crl. M.C No.10599 of 2025
2
2026:KER:8847
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. M.C No.10599 of 2025
3
2026:KER:8847
C.S.DIAS, J.
----------------------------------------
Crl. M.C No.10599 of 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2026
ORDER
The petitioner is accused in C.C.No.60/2022 on
the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Ernakulam, ('Trial Court', for short), which has arisen
from Crime No. 8 of 2021 registered by the Cyber Crime
Police Station, Kochi City, for allegedly committing the
offences punishable under Sections 51(A), 51(B) and 63
of the Copyright Act, 1957.
2. The petitioner 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 petitioner and the 2nd
respondent, who has executed Annexure 3 affidavit,
2026:KER:8847
affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned counsel for the 2nd 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
2026:KER:8847
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
2026:KER:8847
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 and Annexure A2 Final
Report in Crime No. 8 of 2021 registered by the Cyber
Crime Police Station, Kochi City and all further
proceedings in C.C. No. 60 / 2022 of the Trial Court, as
against the petitioner, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
SRS/02.02.2026 C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
2026:KER:8847
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 10599 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR AND FIS IN
CRIME NO: 08 OF 2021 OF CYBER CRIME PS
KOCHI POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN
C.C. NO. 60/2022 BEFORE CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM
Annexure A3 THE AFFIDAVIT, SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT
