[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Sharafali C vs State Of Kerala on 19 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
1
2026:KER:15396
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 30TH MAGHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
CRIME NO.986/2020 OF Parappangadi Police Station,
Malappuram
AGAINST THE ORDER IN SC NO.1337 OF 2025 OF DISTRICT COURT&
SESSIONS COURT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MANJERI
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 4:
1 SHARAFALI C,
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.MOHAMMED, CHAPPANGATTIL HOUSE,
PALATHINGAL P.O. ULLANAM,PARAPPANANGADI,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676303
2 ABDUL RASHEED V.
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.KUNHIMMU,VAMBISSERI HOUSE, PALATHINGAL P.O.,
ULLANAM, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676303
3 FASALU RAHMAN P.V.,
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O.RAYINKUTTY, PARAMBUVEETTIL HOUSE,PALATHINGAL
P.O., ULLANAM, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 676303
4 IRSHAD A.V.,
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O.HASSANKOYA, AVANIVEETTIL HOUSE,
PALATHINGAL, P.O.ULLANAM, PARAPPANANGADI,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676303
BY ADVS.
SHRI.K.K.SAIDALAVI
SRI.K.K.NASRUL HAQUE
CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
2
2026:KER:15396
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
3 ISMAYIL P.,
AGED 46 YEARS
S/O. PAREEKKUTTY, PATHUR HOUSE,
ATTAKKUZHINGARA, P.O.ULLANAM, PARAPPANANGADI,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676303
BY ADVS.
SRI.E.S.ASHRAF
SMT.HANNA K. P.
SR.PP.SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
3
2026:KER:15396
C.S.DIAS, J.
------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 1170 of 2026
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of February, 2026
ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in SC
No.1337/2025 on the file of the Court of the Sessions,
Manjeri, which has originated from Crime
No.986/2020 registered by the Parappanangadi
Police Station, Malappuram, alleging the commission
of the offences punishable under Sections 286, 337
read with 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 filing of the
CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
2026:KER:15396
complaint has been amicably settled between the
petitioners and the 3rd respondent, who has executed
affidavit dated 26.01.2026, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and
the learned Counsel for the 3rd respondent.
4. The learned counsel on either side submit that,
with the intervention of relatives and well-wishers,
the parties have resolved their disputes amicably. The
3rd 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
CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
2026:KER:15396
this Court to quash criminal proceedings on the
ground of 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
CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
2026:KER:15396
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 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, Annexures A1 FIR, A2 final report and
all further proceedings in SC No.1337/2025 on the
file of the Court of the Sessions, Manjeri, as against
the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS
JUDGE
GBG
CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
2026:KER:15396
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 1170 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-A1 ACCUSED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN
S.C.NO.1337/2025 IN CRIME NO.0986/2020
OF PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, ON THE FILE OF
DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT-I, MANJERI,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, DATED 16/12/2020.
Annexure-A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.0986/2020 OF PARAPPANANGADI
POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PENDING AS S.C.1337/2025, FILED BEFORE
THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,
MANJERI.
