[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Navaskhan vs State Of Kerala on 10 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 1851 OF 2025 1 2026:KER:12226
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. 1851 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1978/2015 OF Nedumangad Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.1053 OF 2016 OF
ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/SUB COURT/COMMERCIAL COURT, NEDUMANGAD
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS 1 TO 3 :
1 NAVASKHAN,
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED KASIM, AL NASEEB, FM LAND, MULAVANCODE,
VALIKODE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
2 RIJU M A,
AGED 46 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED RASHEED, KUNNATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, VALICODE,
NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
3 RIYAS,
AGED 49 YEARS
MUHAMMED RASHEED, KUNNATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, VALIKODE,
KOPPAM, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
BY ADV SRI.SHAKTHI PRAKASH
RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT AND INJURED :
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN -
695541
CRL.MC NO. 1851 OF 2025 2 2026:KER:12226
3 SAJITH S R,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O SHAHUL HAMEED, SHAFEEK MANZIL, THADATHARIKATHU
VEEDU, HOUSING BOARD,NETTA, NEDUMANGAD TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
4 SHAHUL HAMEED M,
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O MUHAMNMED ISAMIL,SHAFEEK MANIL, THADATHARIKATHU
VEEDU, HOUSING BOARD,NETTA, NEDUMANGAD TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
BY ADV SRI.V.A.VINOD
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. 1851 OF 2025 3 2026:KER:12226
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
CRL.MC NO. 1851 OF 2025
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of February, 2026
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 3 in
S.C.No.1053/2016 on the file of the Assistant Sessions
Court, Nedumangad (Trial Court), which has originated
from Crime No.1978/2015 registered by the Nedumangad
Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, alleging the
commission of the offences punishable under Sections
323, 324, 506(ii) and 308 r/w 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
CRL.MC NO. 1851 OF 2025 4 2026:KER:12226
respondents 3 and 4, who have executed Annexures A3
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 3 and 4.
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 3 and 4 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
CRL.MC NO. 1851 OF 2025 5 2026:KER:12226
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
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
CRL.MC NO. 1851 OF 2025 6 2026:KER:12226
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
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 A1FIR, Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.
1978/2015 of the Nedumangad Police Station and all
further proceedings in S.C.No.1053/2016 on the file of the
Trial Court, as against the petitioners, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
SCB/10.02.26.
CRL.MC NO. 1851 OF 2025 7 2026:KER:12226
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 1851 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A-1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1978/2015 OF NEDUMANGAD
POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED
05.12.2015 ALONG WITH FIS
Annexure A-2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN S.C NO
1053/2016 PENDING ON THE FILES OF HON'BLE
ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, NEDUMANGAD DATED
12.07.2016
Annexure A-3 ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE
RESPONDENT 3 DATED 19.02.2025
Annexure A-4 ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE
RESPONDENT 4 DATED 19.02.2025
