[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Abduil Fahad M vs State Of Kerala on 9 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:11568
CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 20TH MAGHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
CRIME NO.333/2024 OF MELPARAMBA POLICE STATION, Kasargod
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.1926 OF 2024
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,HOSDRUG
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS 1-5:
1 ABDUIL FAHAD M,
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED ,MANI HOUSE DELI, KUNNUPARA,
CHEMMANAD, MELPARAMBA , KASARGOD, KERALA, PIN -
671317
2 SAVAD K B
AGED 23 YEARS
S/O ABDUL KHADER, DELI, KUNNUPARA, CHEMMANAD,
MELPARAMBA, KASARGOD, KERALA, PIN - 671317
3 MUHAMMED NIBRAS P.M ,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED KUNHI, NIBRAS MANZIL, DELI, JUNCTION,
KUNNUPARA, CHEMMANAD, MELPARAMBA, KASARGOD, KERALA,
PIN - 671317
4 MUHAMMAD AL AMEEN T M,
AGED 27 YEARS
/O THAJUDHEEN ,JUMANA MANZIL, KUNNUPARA, DELI,
CHEMMANAD, VILLAGE, MELPARAMBA PS, KASARGOD,
KERALA, PIN - 671317
5 SALMANUL FARIS K B ,
AGED 27 YEARS
S/O ABDUL KHADER , DEENAR HOUSE, KUNNUPARA, DELI,
CHEMMANAD, VILLAGE, MELPARAMBA, KASARGOD, KERALA,
PIN - 671317
2026:KER:11568
CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
2
BY ADVS.
SHRI.NESAMUDHEEN
SMT.SAFA C.M.
SMT.THASMIYA MANIKANDAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 ABDULLA K.S
AGED 62 YEARS
S/O ABDUL RAHIMAN (L), RESIDING AT ANINHA HOUSE,
KOLIYADUKKAM, PERMBALA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN - 671317
3 MUHAMMED SHAFI M A ,
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O ABOOBACKER, RESIDING AT SAJIDA MANZIL,
KOLIYADUKKAM, PERUMBALA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT
KERALA, PIN - 671317
BY ADV SHRI.MUHAMMED SWADIQ
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.SMT.SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:11568
CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
3
ORDER
Dated this the 9th day of February, 2026
The petitioners are the accused 1 to 5 in
C.C.No.1926/2024 on the file of the Court of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate-II, Hosdurg, (Trial Court), which
has originated from Crime No.333/2024 registered by the
Melparamba Police Station, Kasaragod, alleging the
commission of the offences punishable under Sections
189(2), 191(2), 126(2) and 115(2) r/w Section 190 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
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
and A4 affidavits, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
2026:KER:11568
CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
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
respondents 2 and 3 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 authoritatively
laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Gian Singh v.
State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303], State of Madhya
2026:KER:11568
CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
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 process without advancing the cause of justice.
Furthermore, the settlement would promote harmony
between the parties and restore peace. Hence, this Court
2026:KER:11568
CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
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 C.C. No. 1926/2024 of the Trial
Court, as against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
SD/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
2026:KER:11568
CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 692 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH
FIS IN CRIME NO: 333/2024 OF MELPARAMBA
POLICE STATION, DATED 11.07.2024
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CC
NO: 1926 OF 2024 NOW PENDING BEFORE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -
II, HOSDURG, KASARGOD
Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
10.12.2025 AFFIRMED AND SIGNED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO: 2
Annexure A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
10.12.2025 AFFIRMED AND SIGNED BY THE
RESPONDENT NO:3
