[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Rajeev K vs State Of Kerala on 21 January, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:4913
CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 1ST MAGHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
CRIME NO.86/2020 OF Chevayur Police Station, Kozhikode
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.269 OF 2022
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOZHIKODE
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS 2 & 3:
1 RAJEEV K,
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O KARATTUMMAL VASUDEVAN NAIR, PRARTHANA HOUSE,
NEAR FERONA CHURCH, MARUNNARA ROAD, PAROPPADY,
CHEVAYOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673009
2 VASANTHA MANGALASSERI,
AGED 68 YEARS
W/O KARATTUMMAL VASUDEVAN NAIR, PRARTHANA HOUSE,
NEAR FERONA CHURCH, MARUNNARA ROAD, PAROPPADY,
CHEVAYOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673009
BY ADVS.
SHRI.P.V.ANOOP
SRI.PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP
RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 P. VIJAYAKRISHNAN,
2026:KER:4913
CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
2
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O RAGHAVAN, RESIDING AT P 34/1220, THULASI (H),
NEAR SELLERA CONVENT, MALAPPARAMBA P.O, VENGERY,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673009
3 SUNITHA VIJAYAKRISHNAN,
AGED 53 YEARS
W/O P.VIJAYAKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT P 34/1220,
THULASI(H), NEAR SELLERA CONVENT, MALAPPARAMBA P.O,
VENGERY, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673009
BY ADV SHRI.JUNAID.V.S
PP. SRI. M.P.PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:4913
CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
3
ORDER
Dated this the 21st day of January, 2026
The petitioners are the accused 2 and 3 in
C.C.No.269/2022 on the file of the Court of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate, Kozhikode (Trial Court), which
has originated from Crime No.86/2020 registered by the
Chevayoor Police Station, Kozhikode alleging the
commission of the offence punishable under Section 420
r/w 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
respondents 2 and 3, who have executed Annexures E
and F affidavits, affirming the settlement.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
2026:KER:4913
CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
petitioners, 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:4913
CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
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:4913
CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
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 FIR, Annexure B final report and all further
proceedings in C.C. No.269/2022 of the Trial Court as
against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
SD/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
rmm21/01/2026
2026:KER:4913
CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 7 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 86/2020 OF
CHEVAYOOR POLICE DATED 08.02.2020
Annexure B COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 86
OF 2020 WHICH IS NOW PENDING AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS AS C C.NO.269/2022 ON THE
FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED
11.02.2022
Annexure C TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
30.01.2020
Annexure D TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DATED
29.01.2022
Annexure E AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 18.12.2025
Annexure F AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 18.12.2025
