Kerala High Court
Charles Baby vs State Of Kerala on 31 March, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 2612 OF 2026
1
2026:KER:28993
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2026 / 10TH CHAITHRA, 1948
CRL.MC NO. 2612 OF 2026
CRIME NO.1702/2024 OF Peroorkada Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED IN CP NO.15 OF 2025 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS IV (MOBILE), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
PETITIONER/S:
1 CHARLES BABY,
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O BABY,ONNISSERITHOTTATHIL HOUSE, MARADY VILLAGE,
MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 686663
2 ANANDHU KRISHNAN A S,
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O AJITH KUMAR,AYILLAM HOUSE, ERAYAMCODE,THOLICODE
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695541
3 FIHAN,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O CINIL SAIBAN,SHAMLA HOUSE, KAYAMKULAM
VILLAGE,KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK, KAYAMKULAM,ALAPPUZHA, PIN
- 690502
4 MUHAMMED FAIS,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O MUHAMMED RAFI,RAFI MANZIL, MULAKKUZHA PANCHAYAT,
MULAKUZHA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 689505
5 VISHNU S KUMAR,
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O SANTHOSH KUMAR,NALINAM HOUSE, VELLOOR ROAD,
PURAMERI VILLAGE, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673503
6 PRAN C,
CRL.MC NO. 2612 OF 2026
2
2026:KER:28993
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O CHANDRAN,KARTHIKA BHAVANAM, MANACAUD WARD,MANACAUD
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695009
7 AAMIN JAVAD,
AGED 22 YEARS
S/O JAVAD,MURUKALAYAM KOTTAKYADU HOUSE, THODIYOOR
VILLAGE,KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM, PIN - 690523
BY ADVS.
SRI.GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN
SRI.R.RAHMATHULLAH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PEROORKADA POLICE STATION,
PEROORKADA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695005
3 AMAN GAFOOR,
S/O SHAMMI GAFOOR,ERATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MATHILAKAM
WARD,KODUNGALOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680685
BY ADV SHRI.ANEESHRAJ R.
OTHER PRESENT:
SR PP SMT SEETHA S
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.03.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 2612 OF 2026
3
2026:KER:28993
C.S.DIAS, J.
---------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 2612 of 2026
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of March, 2026
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused 1 to 7 in CP No.15/2025 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-IV (Mobile), Thiruvananthapuram, which has originated from Crime No.1702/2024, registered by the Peroorkada Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, alleging the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 126(2), 351(2), 296(b), 115(2), 110, 305 and 238 read with Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
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. 2612 OF 2026 4 2026:KER:28993 amicably settled between the petitioners and the 3rd respondent, who has executed Annexure-III 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. 2612 OF 2026 5 2026:KER:28993
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. 2612 OF 2026 6 2026:KER:28993 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-I FIR, Annexure-II Final Report and all further proceedings in CP No.15/2025 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-IV (Mobile), Thiruvananthapuram, as against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE rkc CRL.MC NO. 2612 OF 2026 7 2026:KER:28993 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 2612 OF 2026 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-I TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN 1702/2024 OF PEROORKADA POLICE STATION DATED 02-12-2024 Annexure-II TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN 1702/2024 OF PEROORKADA POLICE STATION DATED 25-02-2025 Annexure-III THE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 17-10-2025