[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Rejil P. R vs State Of Kerala on 2 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:8446
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. 11121 OF 2025
CRIME NO.633/2022 OF Marangattupally Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.616 OF 2022
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,PALA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3:
1 REJIL P. R,
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O. RAJU, PARACKEL HOUSE, VAYALA KARA,
KADAPLAMATTOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN -
686587
2 ALBIN K BOBAN,
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O BOBAN, KOCHUPURACKAL HOUSE,
PADINJATTUMBHAGOM KARA,
KOTTAMURY BHAGOM, ATHIRUMPUZHA VILLAGE,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686562
3 BIBIN BENNY,
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O BENNY, MADAPPALLY HOUSE,
PADINJATTUMBHAGOM KARA,
KOTTAMURY BHAGOM, ATHIRUMPUZHA VILLAGE,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686562
BY ADV SHRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
CRL.MC NO.11121 of 2025 2
2026:KER:8446
2 KAILASKUMAR S,
AGED 23 YEARS
S/O SASIKUMAR, KOOTTUMALA HOUSE,
VAYALA PO, KADAPLAMATTOM VILLAGE,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686587
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
MARANGATTUPPALLI POLICE STATION,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT- THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
BY ADV SHRI.PRAVEEN S.
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- SMT SEETHA S
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.11121 of 2025 3
2026:KER:8446
Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2025
ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No.
633/2022 registered by the Marangattuppally Police
Station, Kottayam District, alleging the commission of
the offences punishable under Sections 392, 363, 341,
323, 506(ii) and 294(b) 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
second respondent, who has executed Annexure A3
affidavit, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned counsel for the second respondent.
CRL.MC NO.11121 of 2025 4
2026:KER:8446
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 petitioners are the history sheeters.
Moreover, in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10
SCC 303] and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi
Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688], the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has categorically held that in cases
where the accused are alleged to have committed an
offence under Section 392 IPC, the criminal proceedings
may not be quashed. Therefore, this Court may not
quash the proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers
under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
CRL.MC NO.11121 of 2025 5
2026:KER:8446
7. 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 laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Gian Singh's case, State of Madhya Pradesh's
case (supra) and Naushey Ali v. State of U.P. [(2025) 4
SCC 78], and in a host of judicial pronouncements.
However, in the above decisions, it is also held that, in
case the accused has antecedents and the offence
alleged against the accused is under Section 392 IPC,
this Court shall not quash the proceedings.
8. In light of the above exposition of law, I am not
inclined to exercise the inherent powers of this Court
528 of the BNSS.
In the aforesaid circumstances, this Crl.M.C is
dismissed, but without prejudice to the right of the
petitioners to raise all their contentions before the Trial
Court, including filing an application for discharge. If
such an application is filed, provided the charge is not
CRL.MC NO.11121 of 2025 6
2026:KER:8446
framed till date, the Trial Court is directed to consider
and dispose of the application, untrammelled by any
observations made in this order.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk
2026:KER:8446
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 11121 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT (FIR) DTD. 27.05.2022
ALONG WITH FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT
(FIS) IN CRIME NO. 633 OF 2022 OF
MARANGATTUPPALLI POLICE STATION IN
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT
DTD. 23.06.2022 IN CRIME NO. 633 OF 2022
OF MARANGATTUPPALLI POLICE STATION,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT
Annexure A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT
FURNISHED BY THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT
DATED 17.09.2025
