[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Sidiquesha @ Sidheek vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 1473 OF 2026
1
2026:KER:17425
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. 1473 OF 2026
CRIME NO.1811/2023 OF Sooranadu Police Station, Kollam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.80 OF 2024 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - II, SASTHAMCOTTA
PETITIONER/S:
1 SIDIQUESHA @ SIDHEEK,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O.BASHEER, ETTUKETTUMVILA VEEDU, PALLIMURI, NEAR
CASHEW COMPANY, PORUVAZHY, KOLLAM -, PIN - 690520
2 SAJEED,
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O.SAJEEM, THADATHIL VADAKKATHIL, KOMALLOOR, NEAR
CASHEW COMPANY, CHUNAKKARA, ALAPPUZHA NOW RESIDING AT
ETTUKETTUMVILA VEEDU, PALLIMURI, NEAR CASHEW COMPANY,
PORUVAZHY, KOLLAM, PIN - 690520
3 MUHAMMED NAZIM,
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O.NAZAR, MUKALUVILA VADAKKATHIL, KAMPALDI, WEST
OSTHAMUKKU, PORUVAZHY, KOLLAM, PIN - 690520
4 SUHAID,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O. JALEEL, CHARUVILA THEKKATHIL, THEKKEMURI, NEAR
AREEKKAL KALUGU, SOORANADU NORTH, KOLLAM -, PIN -
690561
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SIJU
SMT.ANJANA KANNATH
SMT.SAFNA P.S.
CRL.MC NO. 1473 OF 2026
2
2026:KER:17425
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
SOORANADU POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT -, PIN -
690522
3 SHANAVAS,
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.SHAJI, SHANAVAS MANZIL, NEAR
SAMSKARIKA NILAYAM, AMBALATHUMBHAGOM MURI, PORUVAZHY
VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT -, PIN - 690520
BY ADV SRI.A.MUHAMMED RAFFI
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.SMT.SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 1473 OF 2026
3
2026:KER:17425
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 1473 OF 2026
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of February, 2026
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused 1 to 4 in CC
No.80/2024 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-II, Sasthamcotta, which has originated
from Crime No.1811/2023 registered by the Sooranadu
Police Station, Kollam, alleging the commission of the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 324
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 92(a) and 92(b) of the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities Act, 2016.
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 complaint has been
CRL.MC NO. 1473 OF 2026
2026:KER:17425
amicably settled between the petitioners and the 3rd
respondent, who has executed Annexure-A3 affidavit,
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.
CRL.MC NO. 1473 OF 2026
2026:KER:17425
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 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
CRL.MC NO. 1473 OF 2026
2026:KER:17425
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 A1 FIR, Annexure A2 Final Report and all
further proceedings in CC No.80/2024 on the file of the
Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II,
Sasthamcotta, as against the petitioners, are hereby
quashed.
sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rkc
CRL.MC NO. 1473 OF 2026
2026:KER:17425
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 1473 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR WITH FIS IN CRIME
NO.1811/2023 OF SOORANADU POLICE STATION
DATED 12.12.2023
Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO. 1811/2023 OF SOORANADU POLICE STATION
DATED 15.2.2024
Annexure A3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
REGARDING THE COMPROMISE DATED 13.2.2026
