[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Ibrahim Khaleel vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:17373
CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
CRIME NO.538/2017 OF Manjeswar Police Station, Kasargod
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.448 OF 2024 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KASARAGOD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
IBRAHIM KHALEEL,
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O HUSSAINAR, R/AT BADRIYA MAHAL, LH NAGAR,
MACHAMPADY,BADAJE P.O, MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD, PIN -
671323
BY ADV SHRI.P.RAKESH THAMBAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & INJURED:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 ABDUL LATHEEF,
AGED 44 YEARS
S/O ABDUL KHADER,R/AT JAMAL HOUSE, MACHAMPADI,
BADAJE P.O, MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671323
3 ISMAIL.G,
AGED 44 YEARS
S/O IBRAHIM, R/AT MACHAMPADI HOUSE, BADAJE P.O,
MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671323
2026:KER:17373
CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
2
BY ADV SHRI.ARUN P.
OTHER PRESENT:
PP.SRI.M.P.PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:17373
CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
3
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 1045 of 2026
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of February, 2025
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.448 of 2024
on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First
Class-II, Kasaragod ('Trial Court', in short), which
originates from Crime No.538 of 2017 registered by the
Manjeswar Police Station, Kasaragod alleging the
commission of the offences punishable under Sections 323,
324, 341 and 294(b) read with Section 34 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
2026:KER:17373
CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
respondents 2 and 3, who have executed Annexures A4
and A5 affidavits, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing
for the petitioner, the learned 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
2026:KER:17373
CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
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 or
element of societal concern is involved; the chances of
conviction are remote in view of the settlement; and the
2026:KER:17373
CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
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 A1 FIR, Annexure A3 Final Report and all
further proceedings in C.C.No.448 of 2024 of the Trial
Court, as against the petitioner, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
dkr
2026:KER:17373
CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 1045 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
538/2017 OF MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT DATED 27.08.2017
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIS IN CRIME
NO.538/2017 OF MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT DATED 27.08.2017
Annexure A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN
CRIME NO. 538/2017 FILED BEFORE THE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II,
KASARAGOD
Annexure A4 THE AFFIDAVIT SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT/ CW1 (INJURED) DATED 13.12.2025
Annexure A5 THE AFFIDAVIT SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT/ CW2 (INJURED) DATED 13.12.2025
Annexure A6 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF MEMO OF EVIDENCE IN
CRIME NO.538/2017 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KASARAGOD
Annexure A7 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE WOUND
CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KASARAGOD
DISTRICT CO-OP HOSPITAL DATED 26.08.2017
IN THE NAME OF RESPONDENT NO.2/CW1
Annexure A8 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE WOUND
CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KASARAGOD
DISTRICT CO-OP HOSPITAL DATED 26.08.2017
IN THE NAME OF RESPONDENT NO.3/CW2
