[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Rahul Thankachan vs State Of Kerala on 10 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:11884
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 21ST MAGHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 602 OF 2026
CRIME NO.128/2021 OF Thankamani Police Station, Idukki
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN ST NO.3550 OF 2025 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, IDUKKI
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
RAHUL THANKACHAN ,
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O THANKACHAN V.K, RESIDING AT VADUTHALIYIL HOUSE,
PANDIPPARA, THANKAMONY(PART),IDUKKI, KERALA, PIN -
685515
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.G.SUNIL (PERUMBAVOOR)
SHRI.SYAM K.P.
SHRI.P.MUHAMMED SHIYAS
SHRI.ASHISH GOPAL K G
SMT.VINIMOL V.S.
SMT.NAMITHA PRASAD
SMT.POOJA K.
SMT.JENY AUGUSTIAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 BABU,
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O CHELLAPPAN, RESIDING AT VADAKKEMURIYIL,
PANDIPPARA, THANKAMONY(PART),PANDIPPARA
IDUKKI, KERALA, PIN - 685515
BY ADVS.
SRI.C.A.ANAS
SMT.REMYA VELAYUDHAN
SMT.LIJI ESAHAK
CRL.MC NO. 602 OF 2026 2
2026:KER:11884
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- SMT SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 602 OF 2026 3
2026:KER:11884
Dated this the 10th day of February, 2026
ORDER
The petitioner is the second accused in S.T. No.
3550/2025 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-I, Idukki ('Trial Court', for short), which
has originated from Crime No. 128/2021 registered by
the Thankamani Police Station, Idukki District, alleging
the commission of the offences punishable under
Sections 448, 294(b), 323, 141 and 143 read with
Section 149 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 registration of the crime has
been amicably settled between the petitioner and the
second respondent, who has executed Annexure IV
affidavit, affirming the settlement.
CRL.MC NO. 602 OF 2026 4
2026:KER:11884
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned counsel for the second 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
authoritatively laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303],
CRL.MC NO. 602 OF 2026 5
2026:KER:11884
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
judicial process without advancing the cause of justice.
Furthermore, the settlement would promote harmony
between the parties and restore peace. Hence, this Court
CRL.MC NO. 602 OF 2026 6
2026:KER:11884
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 I FIR, Annexure II Final Report in
Crime No. 128/2021 of the Thankamani Police Station
and all further proceedings in S.T. No. 3550/2025 of the
Trial Court, as against the petitioner, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
mtk C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
CRL.MC NO. 602 OF 2026 7
2026:KER:11884
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 602 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure I THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR DATED
03.04.2021 IN CRIME NO.128 OF 2021
REGISTERED BY THE THANKAMANY POLICE
STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT AND THE FIS
COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT
Annexure II THE CERTIFIED COPIES OF FINAL REPORT
SUBMITTED BY THE THANKAMANY POLICE
STATION AS ST NO. 3550 OF 2025 PENDING
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT-I, IDUKKI (RELAVANT
PAGES)
Annexure III THE JUDGEMENT DATED 03.11.2025 IN ST NO
1636/2021 BY THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT- I, IDUKKI
Annexure IV THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 13.01.2026 SIGNED BY
