[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Ansar vs Bibin K. Ramakrishnan on 12 January, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:1740
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 22ND POUSHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 11632 OF 2025
CRIME NO.2482/2016 OF Kothamangalam Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.816 OF 2025
OF SPECIAL COURT- OFFENCES UNDER SC/ST (POA) ACT,1989,
ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 ANSAR
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O. MOIDEEN BABU, KUNNAIEL HOUSE,
NELLIKKUZHI P.O., ERUMALAPADI,
KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN-, PIN - 686691
2 CHANDRAN
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O. PAPPU, KUPPASSERIMOLAM HOUSE,
NELLIKKUZHI P.O., ERUMALAPADI,
KOTHAMANGALAM,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-, PIN - 686691
3 KUNHU
AGED 65 YEARS
S/O. PAPPU, KUPPASSERIMOLAM HOUSE,
NELLIKKUZHI P.O., ERUMALAPADI,
KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN-, PIN - 686691
4 SASI
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O. PAPPU, KUPPASSERIMOLAM HOUSE,
NELLIKKUZHI P.O., ERUMALAPADI,
KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN-, PIN - 686691
CRL.MC NO. 11632 OF 2025 2
2026:KER:1740
BY ADV SHRI.JERRY PETER
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 BIBIN K. RAMAKRISHNAN
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O. RAMAKRISHNAN, KUNNATHUKUDI HOUSE,
NELLIKKUZHI P.O., ERUMALAPADI,
KOTHAMANGALAM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-, PIN - 686691
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,, PIN - 682031
BY ADVS.
SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN
SRI.VINOD S. PILLAI
SMT.NAYANA VARGHESE
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- SMT.SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 11632 OF 2025 3
2026:KER:1740
Dated this the 12th day of January, 2026
ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 4 in S.C.No.
816/2025 on the file of the Special Court for SC & ST
(POA) Act, Cases, Ernakulam ('Trial Court', for short),
which has originated from Crime No. 2482/2016
registered by the Kothamangalam Police Station,
Ernakulam District, alleging the commission of the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 506(ii)
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 registration of the crime has
been amicably settled between the petitioners and the
first respondent, who has executed Annexure A3
affidavit, affirming the settlement.
CRL.MC NO. 11632 OF 2025 4
2026:KER:1740
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor, and the
learned counsel for the first respondent.
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 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
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. 11632 OF 2025 5
2026:KER:1740
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, the settlement would promote harmony
between the parties and restore peace. Hence, this Court
CRL.MC NO. 11632 OF 2025 6
2026:KER:1740
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
in Crime No. 2482/2016 of the Kothamangalam Police
Station and all further proceedings in S.C. No.816/2025
of the Trial Court, as against the petitioners, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk/
CRL.MC NO. 11632 OF 2025 7
2026:KER:1740
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 11632 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT IN CRIME NO.2482/2016 OF
KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION DATED
08.10.2016
Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
S.C.NO.816/2025 ON THE FILE OF HONORABLE
SPECIAL COURT FOR SC & ST(POA)ACT CASES,
ERNAKULAM ARISING OUT OF CRIME
NO.2482/2016 OF KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE
STATION DATED 24.11.2016
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED
11.12.2025
