[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Shiyas Ismail vs State Of Kerala on 11 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 935 OF 2026 1
2026:KER:12442
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 22ND MAGHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 935 OF 2026
CRIME NO.312/2022 OF KANJIKUZHY POLICE STATION, IDUKKI
IN CC NO.288 OF 2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I,
IDUKKI
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 8:
1 SHIYAS ISMAIL,
AGED 28 YEARS
ALACKAL, KALAYANTHANI P.O., ALAKODE, THODUPUZHA,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685588
2 AATHMAJ JOY,
AGED 23 YEARS
KOLLAMPARAMBIL, KANJIKUZHI P.O., KANJIKUZHI,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685606
3 THANSEER MAKKAR V.M.
AGED 22 YEARS
VALLYAKATTIL, KANJIKUZHY P.O., KANJIKUZHY,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685606
4 JOYAL JOSE
AGED 27 YEARS
CHALIL, KUNNAM, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT,
PIN - 685605
5 IBRAHIMKUTTY ASHRAF
AGED 24 YEARS
KULATHINKAL, THADIYAMPADU P.O., THADIYAMPADU,
IDUKKI (PART), IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685602
6 SAINUL ABIDEEN B,
AGED 25 YEARS
MUKALEKKUDIYIL, KANJIKUZHI P.O., PRABHACITY,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685606
CRL.MC NO. 935 OF 2026 2
2026:KER:12442
7 AJOBIN K JOMON
AGED 25 YEARS
KALLANIKKAL, NELLIPUZHAKAVALA, THADIAMPADU P.O.,
IDUKKI (PART), IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685602
8 JOSHY MATHEW,
AGED 45 YEARS
KALLACHERIL HOUSE, ALPARA, KANJIKUZHI, IDUKKI
DISTRICT, PIN - 685606
BY ADVS. SMT.SHAHANAS SALMA ABBAS
SHRI.SIDHARTH T.
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031
2 AJU ROBERT,
AGED 26 YEARS
MANACKAL HOUSE, PAZHAYARIKANDOM,
KANJIKKUZHI, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685606
BY ADV SHRI.STEPHY K REGI
SR PP SMT SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 935 OF 2026 3
2026:KER:12442
ORDER
Dated this the 11th day of February, 2026
The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 8 in
C.C.No.288/2022 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-I, Idukki, which has arisen from Crime
No.312/2022 registered by the Kanjikuzhy Police Station,
Idukki, alleging the commission of the offences punishable
under Sections 143, 144, 146, 147, 294(b), 323, 324 and
506(i) read with Section 149 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 2nd respondent, who
has executed Annexure-3 affidavit, affirming the settlement.
CRL.MC NO. 935 OF 2026 4
2026:KER:12442
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners, 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 2nd 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
CRL.MC NO. 935 OF 2026 5
2026:KER:12442
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 continuation of the
proceedings would merely burden the judicial process
without advancing the cause of justice. Furthermore, the
CRL.MC NO. 935 OF 2026 6
2026:KER:12442
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-1 First Information Report, Annexure-2 Final
Report in Crime No.312/2022 of the Kanjikuzhy Police
Station, and all further proceedings in C.C.No.288/2022 on
the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I,
Idukki, as against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
NAB
2026:KER:12442
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 935 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 THE CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE FIR AND FIS IN
CRIME NO. 312/2022 OF KANJIKUZHI POLICE
STATION DATED 16.05.2022
ANNEXURE 2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
DATED 24.05.2022 WITH ALL DOCUMENTS FILED
IN C.C NO. 288/2022 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-1, IDUKKI.
ANNEXURE 3 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 11.12.2025
