[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Ram Kishore vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025 1 2026:KER:16422
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025
CRIME NO.478/2007 OF Sreekariyam Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.137 OF 2020 OF
ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/I ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED :
RAM KISHORE,
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O. SUBRAMANIAPILLAI KRISHNAN, AVITTAM HOUSE, VINAYAKA
NAGAR, KALLAMPALLY WARD, EDAVAKODE, MAVARTHALAKONAM
MURI, ULLOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN
- 695011
BY ADV SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED
RESPONDENT/STATE CW1 AND CW2:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031
2 SHYAMCHAND,
AGED 44 YEARS
S/O. GOPI,SHARATH CHANDRA NIVAS, KALLAMPALLY VINAYAKA
NAGAR,MAVARTHALAKONAM MURI, ULLOOR VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695011
3 SARATH @ SARATHCHANDRAN,
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. GOPI, SHARATH CHANDRA NIVAS, KALLAMPALLY VINAYAKA
NAGAR, MAVARTHALAKONAM MURI, ULLOOR VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695011
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025 2 2026:KER:16422
BY ADV RAJEE P MATHEWS
SR.PP.SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025 3 2026:KER:16422
C.S.DIAS,J
--------------------------------------------
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of February, 2026
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in S.C No.137/2020 on
the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, ('Trial Court', in short),
which has originated from Crime No.478/2007, registered by
the Sreekaryam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, alleging
the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 143,
147, 148, 109, 341, 324, 326 and 307 read with Section 149 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC', in short).
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 2 and 3, who have executed Annexures D and
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025 4 2026:KER:16422
E affidavits, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the
petitioner, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor and the
learned Counsel for the respondents 2 and 3.
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 submit that with
the intervention of well-wishers and friends, the parties have
arrived at an amicable settlement. The other accused in the
crime have been honourably acquitted as per Annexure-B
judgment. The specific overt act for allegedly committing the
offence under Section 307 is attributed against the 1 st
accused, who has also been acquitted. The respondents 2 and
3 have no objection in the entire proceedings being quashed.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relies on the
decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in Naushey Ali v.
State of U.P. [(2025) KHC 6131] in support of the contention
that, there is no legal prohibition in this Court quashing a
criminal proceedings involving an offence under Section 307
of the Indian Penal Code/109 BNS. All that this Court has to
look into is the surrounding circumstances, the nature of the
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025 5 2026:KER:16422
weapon used and the nature of injuries suffered by the victim.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of
this Court to the accident-cum-wound certificate to
substantiate that the respondents 2 and 3 had only suffered
lacerated wounds. He also contended that, other than for the
bare allegation that the petitioner had assisted the 1 st accused
to commit the offence, there is nothing that can be
substantiated by the prosecution in this regard. Therefore, this
Court may quash the entire proceedings as against the
petitioner.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits
that the specific overt act of committing the offence under
Section 307 was attributed against the 1st accused, who has
been acquitted as per Annexure B judgment. Likewise, he
made available the accident-cum-wound certificate of the
injured persons to substantiate that they are only suffered
lacerated injuries, which was also inflicted by the 1 st accused.
Nonetheless, the Investigating Officer has reported that the
parties have arrived at a genuine and bona fide settlement. He
does not seriously dispute the submissions made by the
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025 6 2026:KER:16422
learned Counsel for the petitioner and the respondents 2 and
3. He concedes to the fact that the respondent 2 and 3 have
not suffered any serious injuries, which is corroborated by the
accident-cum-wound certificate.
7. 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 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's case [supra], 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.
8. On an overall consideration of the facts, the materials
on record, the law on the point and particularly after going
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025 7 2026:KER:16422
through the findings in Annexure -B judgment and the fact
that the specific overt act is attributed against the 1 st accused
and further that the injured have only suffered lacerated
wounds, I am satisfied that this is a fit case to exercise the
inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS,
particularly since there is 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 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-A Final Report and all further proceedings in SC
No.137/2020 on the file of the Trial Court, as against the
petitioner, are hereby quashed.
Sd/
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
SCB.24.02.26
CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025 8 2026:KER:16422
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 8998 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.478/2007 OF SREEKARYAM POLICE STATION.
Annexure-B TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08/07/2025 IN
S.C.NO.832/2017 OF THE PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT
SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
Annexure-C TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED
27/12/2024 IN S.C.NO.503/2015 & 104/2020 OF
THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT-V,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
Annexure-D AFFIDAVIT SWORN AND EXECUTED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT/CW1 DATED 17/09/2025.
Annexure-E AFFIDAVIT SWORN AND EXECUTED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT/CW2 DATED 17/09/2025.
