| |
CDJ 2025 Ker HC 1794
|
| Court : High Court of Kerala |
| Case No : CRL.MC No. 10731 of 2025 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.S. DIAS |
| Parties : P. H. Aswin Chandran & Others Versus State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor. High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam. Through Station House Officer. Marrarikulam Police Station. Alappuzha & Others |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioners: Joseph Rony Jose, Advocate. For the Respondents: E.A. Jose, Advocate. |
| Date of Judgment : 08-12-2025 |
| Head Note :- |
Indian Penal Code - Sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b), 506(i), 393, and 436 -
Comparative Citation:
2025 KER 94754, |
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- Sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b), 506(i), 393, and 436 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code
- Indian Penal Code
2. Catch Words:
- Settlement
- Quash
- Inherent jurisdiction
- Criminal proceedings
3. Summary:
The petitioners, charged in S.C.No.552/2023 for offences under various IPC sections, invoked Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash the case, citing an amicable settlement affirmed by the second respondent. Both parties, their relatives, and the Public Prosecutor confirmed the genuine settlement and expressed no desire to continue prosecution. The Court referred to Supreme Court precedents allowing quashal where offences are not grave and parties have settled. Considering the non‑heinous nature of the offences, lack of public interest, and the settlement’s promotion of harmony, the Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction. Consequently, the criminal miscellaneous case was allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioners were quashed.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
1. The petitioners are accused in S.C.No.552/2023 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Alappuzha (‘Trial Court’, for short), which has originated from Crime No.414/2022 registered by the Mararikulam Police Station, Alappuzha District, alleging the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b), 506(i), 393, and 436 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 second respondent, who has executed Annexure B 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 second 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], 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 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 Final Report in Crime No. 414/2022 of the Mararikulam Police Station and all further proceedings in S.C. No. 552/2023 of the Trial Court, as against the petitioners, are hereby quashed.
|
| |