[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Shijin vs State Of Kerala on 11 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:12450
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. 9325 OF 2025
CRIME NO.238/2024 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, Kollam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.658 OF 2025 OF
DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT / RENT CONTROL APPELLATE
AUTHORITY, KOLLAM
PETITIONER/FIFTH ACCUSED:
SHIJIN,
AGED 46 YEARS
S/O VINCENT, ASNA ARCADE THANNI CHERRY
ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, MAYYANADU PO,
KOLLAM (DIST)-, PIN - 691303
BY ADV SRI.M.RAJESH
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION,
ERAVIPURAM PO, KOLLAM, PIN - 691011
3 SYAM S ,
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O SASIDHARAN ,SS BHAVAN,
SOUHRIDA NAGAR-293 MUNDAKKAL VILLAGE,
ERAVIPURAM PO, KOLLAM (DIST)-, PIN - 691011
4 JAYESHMON J,
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O JAYACHANDRAN , KARALI USHAS-1723,
THEKKEVILA CHERRY, MUNDAKKAL VILLAGE,
ERAVIPURAM PO, KOLLAM (DIST)-, PIN - 691011
BY ADV SRI.C.R.JAYAKUMAR
CRL.MC NO. 9325 OF 2025 2
2026:KER:12450
OTHER PRESENT:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- SRI M P PRASANTH
CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 9325 OF 2025 3
2026:KER:12450
Dated this the 11th day of February, 2026
ORDER
The petitioner is the fifth accused in S.C. No.
658/2025 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kollam ('Trial
Court', for short), which has originated from Crime No.
238/2024 registered by the Eravipuram Police Station,
Kollam District, alleging the commission of the offences
punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 294(b), 324
and 307, 323 and 506 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
respondents 3 and 4, who have executed Annexures 3
and 4 affidavits, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for
CRL.MC NO. 9325 OF 2025 4
2026:KER:12450
the petitioner, 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
party respondents 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 specific overt act of committing the
offence under Section 307 has been attributed against
the first accused. The petitioner has been arraigned as
an accused in the crime in view of Section 149 of the
IPC.
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. 9325 OF 2025 5
2026:KER:12450
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, I find that since the specific overt act of
committing the offence under Section 307 of the IPC is
2026:KER:12450
attributed against the first accused and the petitioner
has been implicated as the accused in the crime on the
allegation that he in prosecution of the common
intention with the accused persons had committed the
above offences, I am satisfied this is a fit case to exercise
the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which
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 FIR, Annexure 2 charge sheet in Crime No.
238/2024 of the Eravipuram Police Station and all
further proceedings in S.C. No. 658/2025 of the Trial
Court, as against the petitioner, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk
CRL.MC NO. 9325 OF 2025 7
2026:KER:12450
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 9325 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
238/2024 OF THE ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION
Annexure 2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN
CRIME NO. 238/2024 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE
STATION
Annexure 3 AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 11.10.2025
Annexure 4 AFFIDAVIT SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
DATED 11.10.2025
Annexure 5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE
HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN MANOJ & ORS VS
STATE OF KERALA ( 2014 3 KHC 524)
Annexure 6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CITATION IN SAJEEV
VS STATE OF KERALA (2022 2 ILR(KER) 622)
