[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Khabil Khan vs State Of Kerala on 11 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 1028 OF 2026 1
2026:KER:12448
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. 1028 OF 2026
CRIME NO.722/2019 OF TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
IN CC NO.285 OF 2019 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE , THRISSUR
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3:
1 KHABIL KHAN,
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O JAKIR HUSAIN, BISHAMBHARA, CHHATA,
MATHURA UTTAR PRADESH, PIN - 281401
2 SIKANDAR,
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O JAKIR HUSAIN, BISHAMBHARA, CHHATA,
MATHURA UTTAR PRADESH, PIN - 281401
3 DILBAG,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O JAKIR HUSAIN, BISHAMBHARA, CHHATA,
MATHURA UTTAR PRADESH, PIN - 281401
BY ADVS.
SRI.R.ROHITH
SMT.HARISHMA P.THAMPI
SMT.SAIRA SOURAJ P.
RESPONDENT/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULUM, PIN - 682031
CRL.MC NO. 1028 OF 2026 2
2026:KER:12448
2 SOORAJ
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O SUKUMARAN, SUMALAYAMVEEDU PERINGAVU DESOM,
PERINGAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680008
3 SREECHITHRA MOHAN,
AGED 39 YEARS,W/O SOORAJ, SUMALAYAMVEEDU PERINGAVU
DESOM, PERINGAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN -
680008
BY ADV SHRI.M.T.SAMEER
SR PP SRI C S HRITHWIK
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. 1028 OF 2026 3
2026:KER:12448
ORDER
Dated this the 11th day of February, 2026
The petitioners are the accused 1 to 3 in
C.C.No.285/2019 on the file of the Court of the Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur, which has arisen from Crime
No.722/2019 registered by the Thrissur Town East Police
Station, alleging the commission of the offences punishable
under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
66D of the Information Technology Act.
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.
CRL.MC NO. 1028 OF 2026 4
2026:KER:12448
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners, the learned Senior 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
2026:KER:12448
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
2026:KER:12448
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 A1 First Information Report, Annexure A2 Final
Report in Crime No.722/2019 of the Thrissur Town East
Police Station and all further proceedings in
C.C.No.285/2019 on the file of the Court of the Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur, as against the petitioners, are
hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
NAB
2026:KER:12448
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 1028 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT IN CRIME. NO. 722/2019 OF EAST
POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DATED 05.06.2019
ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
25.11.2019 IN C.C NO. 285 OF 2019 OF
HON'BLE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT,
THRISSUR
ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
19.12.2025
ANNEXURE A4 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
19.12.2025
