[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Chinju Surendran vs State Of Kerala on 14 January, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:2559
CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 24TH POUSHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
CRIME NO.874/2023 OF Mulanthuruthy Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.218 OF 2024 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PIRAVOM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED :
CHINJU SURENDRAN,
AGED 36 YEARS
D/O M.K SURENDRAN ,KRISHNANIKUNJAM HOUSE, ARAKUNNAM,
EDAKKATTUVAYAL P.O, ERNAKULAM PIN- 682313, NOW
RESIDING AT, KAILASAM HOUSE, 1/210 D, CHETHICODE
P.O, NEAR VELLOZHUKKUMPARA,AMBALLOOR, ERNAKULAM, PIN
- 682315
BY ADVS.
SHRI.B.SURJITH
SMT.RAHANA JOSE
SMT.AKSHAYA REGHU
SHRI.LIJO JOSEPH
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/ DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH
COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 SHANKER MANU J,
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O JOHN M JOSEPH, KAILASAM HOUSE, 1/210 D,
2026:KER:2559
CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
2
CHETHICODE P.O, NEAR VELLOZHUKKUMPARA,AMBALLOOR,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682315,NOW RESIDING AT SOPANAM
HOUSE, EZHUMAYIL PADIKKAN ROAD, OPP. DAFFODILS PLANT
NURSERY, NEAR AMBALLOOR OLD PANCHAYATH STOP,
KANJIRAMATTOM P.O, AMBALLOOR,ERNAKULAM
3 JOHN M JOSEPH,
AGED 70 YEARS
S/O JOSEPH, RESIDING AT SOPANAM HOUSE, EZHUMAYIL
PADIKKAN ROAD, OPP. DAFFODILS PLANT NURSERY, NEAR
AMBALLOOR OLD PANCHAYATH STOP, KANJIRAMATTOM P.O,
AMBALLOOR,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682315
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.R.VENUGOPAL
SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN (SR.)
SR.PP. SMT. SREEJA V.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:2559
CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
3
ORDER
Dated this the 14th day of January, 2026
The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.218/2024
on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate, Piravom, (Trial Court), which has originated
from Crime No.874/2023 registered by the Mulanthuruthy
Police Station, Ernakulam, alleging the commission of the
offences punishable under Sections 341 and 323 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 as
per Annexure A3 Memorandum of Settlement Agreement
dated 11.12.2025 between the petitioner and the 2 nd
respondent.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
2026:KER:2559
CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
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 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
2026:KER:2559
CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
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
2026:KER:2559
CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
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 C.C. No.218/2024 of the Trial Court as
against the petitioner, are hereby quashed.
SD/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm14/1/2026
2026:KER:2559
CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 11459 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
IN CRIME NO.874/2023 OF MULATHURTHY POLICE
STATION
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
C.C.NO.218/2024 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PIRAVOM
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE
DATED 11.12.2025 SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER
AND 2ND RESPONDENT
