High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeQuashed

Nishad Omanakkuttan v. State of Kerala and Adithya S Nair

Case / Petition Number:CRL.MC NO. 1825 OF 2025
Neutral Citation:2025:KER:22151

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C. Jayachandran
Judgment Date
2025-03-13
Court Decision / Holding
In the circumstances, this Crl.MC is allowed. Annexure-1 FIR, Annexure-2 Final Report, and all further proceedings in CC.No.384/2023 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad, are hereby quashed.
Final Disposition
Quashed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Nishad Omanakkuttan

Respondents

  • State of Kerala
  • Station House Officer, Palakkad Town North
  • Adithya S Nair

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Adv Sanoj M.A.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Adv JERIN GEORGE
  • • Sri. Sanal P. Raj (PP)

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Criminal Misc. Case (CrL.MC No.1825 of 2025) heard by a Kerala High Court bench, challenging the order in CC No.384/2023, arising from Crime No.901/2022 registered at Town North Police Station, Palakkad, for offences under IPC sections 354D, 506(i), 511 and 306. The petitioner, Nishad Omanakkuttan, seeks quashing of the entire proceedings under CrPC 482 on the ground that the parties have arrived at a voluntary and amicable settlement. The defacto complainant, Adithya S Nair, supported by the Senior Public Prosecutor, states that the disputes between the parties have been settled and they are living together as husband and wife; she has sworn an affidavit (Annexure 7) stating there is no surviving grievance and no objection to quashing. The court recorded this statement and found the settlement genuine and bonafide. The judgment canvasses guiding principles from Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab and Others (2007) 4 CTC 769, as well as Gian Singh v. State of Punjab; Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab; and Madan Mohan Abbott v. State of Punjab, to justify exercise of the inherent power under CrPC 482 where settlement is real and continuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process. The bench concludes that continuing proceedings would serve no purpose, especially since Section 506(i) is compoundable. Consequently, the Crl.MC is allowed and FIR, Final Report, and all further proceedings in CC 384/2023 are quashed as against the petitioner.

Provisions of Law Cited

CrPC Section 482CrPC Section 320IPC Section 354DIPC Section 506(i)IPC Section 511IPC Section 306

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Abuse of process of the Court
  • Inherent powers under CrPC 482 to quash FIRs
  • Settlement/compounding of offences under 482 CrPC guided by Kulwinder Singh guidelines
  • Common-sense approach to quashing where disputes are purely personal and settlement is genuine

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Counsel for the petitioner contends that although the offences alleged (354D, 506(i), 511, 306 IPC) are non-compoundable under the CrPC, the parties have arrived at a voluntary and fair settlement with the defacto complainant. The complainant asserts that the disputes are personal and that she has no objection to quashing, a position corroborated by Annexure-7 affidavit and statements recorded by the court. Relying on Kulwinder Singh (2007) 4 CTC 769 and later Supreme Court pronouncements (Gian Singh, Narinder Singh, Madan Mohan Abbott), it is urged that the court can invoke its inherent powers under Sec.482 CrPC to quash when the settlement is genuine and continuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process and waste judicial resources. The defence stresses the public interest in serious offences and urges cautious application, but accepts the settlement where the evidence supports fairness.

Contentions of Respondents

State counsel, while acknowledging the seriousness of the offences, argues for a careful, circumspect exercise of power under CrPC 482, ensuring that there is no collusion and that the ends of justice are served. The defacto complainant’s deposition and Annexure-7 affidavit are relied upon to show the settlement is genuine and voluntary. The court is urged to consider the public interest and the possibility of conviction against the backdrop of the private settlement. Nevertheless, given the authorities cited (Kulwinder Singh; Gian Singh; Narinder Singh; Madan Mohan Abbott) which endorse settlement-based quashing in appropriate circumstances, and the fact that 506(i) is a compoundable offence, the respondents acknowledge that quashing could be appropriate if the settlement is bona fide and the proceedings would otherwise be a futile exercise.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another(2007) 4 CTC 769PositiveFive-judge bench laid down broad quashment guidelines under CrPC 482; these have been cited with approval in later decisions.
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another(2012) 10 SCC 303PositiveSupreme Court upheld use of inherent CrPC 482 powers to quash FIRs in serious offences, underscoring settlement-based approaches.
Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab(2014) 6 SCC 466PositiveAffirmed that settlement and bona fide disputes can justify quashing where ends of justice require.
Madan Mohan Abbott v. State of Punjab(2008) 4 SCC 582PositiveAdvocated common-sense approach and recognition of private settlements to avoid futile prosecutions.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Nishad Omanakkuttan v. State of Kerala and Adithya S Nair and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

``` 2025:KER:22151 ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ``` PRESENT ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 13[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1946 ``` ## **`CRL.MC NO. 1825 OF 2025`** ``` CRIME NO.901/2022 OF Town North Police Station, Palakkad AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.384 OF 2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,PALAKKAD ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` NISHAD OMANAKUTTAN AGED 22 YEARS CHEMMAMKODE HOUSE, MANKADA, MANKADA P.O MALAPPURAM DIST, PIN - 679332 ``` ``` BY ADV SANOJ M.A. ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS /STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:`** |**`1`**|**`STATE OF KERALA`**| |---|---| ||**`REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF`**| ||**`KERALA, PIN - 682031`**| |**`2`**|**`STATION HOUSE OFFICER`**| ||**`PALGHAT TOWN NORTH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,`**| ||**`PIN - 678001`**| |**`3`**|**`ADITHYA S NAIR`**| ||**`AGED 21 YEARS`**| ||**`MINI NIVAS, VELLILA, VELLILA P.O MALAPPURAM, PIN -`**| ||**`679342`**| ||**`BY ADV JERIN GEORGE`**| ||**`SRI. SANAL P. RAJ (PP)`**| ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` 2025:KER:22151 ``` Crl.MC.No.1825 of 2025 :2: **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** **C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.** ------------------------------------ **Crl.MC.No.1825 of 2025** -----------------------------------Dated this the 13[th] day of March, 2025 ## **O R D E R** ``` A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another[(2007) 4 CTC 769], framed broad guidelines as regards quashment of the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code in respect of offences which are not compoundable in terms of Section 320 of the Code. One among the guidelines was that the offences against human body, other than murder and culpable homicide, may be permitted to be compounded, when the court is in a position to record a finding that the settlement between the parties is voluntary and fair. These guidelines were quoted with approval by a three ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:22151 ``` Crl.MC.No.1825 of 2025 **==> picture [13 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** ``` Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. Similarly inNarinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to the extent of sanctioning invocation of the inherent power under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the F.I.R in a crime alleging offence under Section 307, which is a henious and serious offence. A practical approach is seen adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme inMadan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] as regards quashment in respect of offences like 379, 406, 409, 418, etc., the relevant findings of which are extracted herebelow: ``` ``` “6.We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the ``` Crl.MC.No.1825 of 2025 **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:22151` **==> picture [13 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** ``` prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground ofrealitiesandbereftofthe technicalities of the law.” ``` ``` 2.In the facts at hand, petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.901 of 2022 of Town North Police Station, Palakkad, now pending as C.C.No.384/2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad. As per the Final report, the offences alleged are under Section 354(D), 506(i), 511 and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner seeks quashment of entire proceedings in the above Calendar Case, on the strength of the settlement arrived at by and between the parties. ``` ``` 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learnedcounselforthedefacto ``` ``` 2025:KER:22151 ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** Crl.MC.No.1825 of 2025 **==> picture [13 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** ``` complainant/respondent no.3 and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the records. ``` ``` 5. When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to record the statement of the defacto complainant. The said direction was complied and the statement was handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that the issues between the petitioner and the defacto complainant are settled amicably and that they are residing together harmoniously as husband and wife. The defacto complainant would further state that the complaint against the petitioner was registered due to compulsion from her family and not at her instance; wherefore, she has no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. That apart, it is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, an affidavit has been sworn to by the defacto complainant (3[rd] respondent herein) as Annexure-7, wherein she would unequivocally state that the disputes have been settled amicably and ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:22151 ``` Crl.MC.No.1825 of 2025 **==> picture [13 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** ``` that they are married. The defacto complainant would also swear that she has no surviving grievance against the petitioner and that she has no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The affidavit is sworn to on her own volition. This Court is therefore convinced that the settlement arrived at is genuine and bonafide. Learned counsel for the defacto complainant would also endorse that the quashment sought for can be allowed. ``` ``` 6. In the light of the above referred facts, this Court is of the opinion that the necessary parameters, as culled out in Narinder Singh (supra), Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and Gian Singh (Supra), are fully satisfied. This court is convinced that further proceedings against the petitioner will be a futile exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have already been settled. There is little possibility of any conviction in the crime. Dehors the settlement ``` **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:22151 ``` Crl.MC.No.1825 of 2025 **==> picture [13 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** ``` arrived at by and between the parties, if they are compelled to face the criminal proceedings, the same, in the estimation of this Court, will amount to abuse of process of Court. The quashment sought for would secure the ends of justice. This Court also notice that offence under Section 506(i) is compoundable, which is all the more a reason to accept the compromise between the parties. ``` ``` In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-1 FIR, Annexure-2 Final Report, and all further proceedings in C.C.No.384/2023 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad, are hereby quashed. ``` Sd/- ## **C. JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE.** Raj. ``` 2025:KER:22151 ``` Crl.MC.No.1825 of 2025 **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** :8: ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1825/2025`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** - **`Annexure 1`** ``` THE TRUE COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT NO. 0901/2022 DATED 24.09.2022, IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 1. ``` ## **`Annexure 2`** ``` THE TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT NO.14/2023 DATED ON 20.03.2023 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT II, PALAKKAD, WHICH IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 2 ``` - **`Annexure 3 THE TRUE COPY OF COMPUTATION CHARGE FORM NO. 32 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 3.`** - **`Annexure 4 THE TRUE COPY OF DEPOSITION DATED 07.11.2024 OF DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 4.`** - **`Annexure 5 DATED ON 14.11.2024 MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 5`** - **`Annexure 6 THE MARRIAGE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONER AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ARE PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 6.`** - **`Annexure 7 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT /3RD RESPONDENT DATED 11.02.2025 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE 7.`**