SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 4344

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
MUHAMMED MUSTHAFA@MUSTHAFA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 4590 OF 2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.JAYARAM
For the Respondents: SRI.R.SREEHARI, SRI.M.P.PRASANTH

Compliance with court orders is vital for exercising inherent jurisdiction in criminal proceedings.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: This judgment involves the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Facts of the Case: The petitioner filed for quashing the final report in a pending criminal case while being absconding for over a decade (paragraphs 2-4).

Findings of Court:
The court declined to exercise its powers due to non-compliance with earlier orders (paragraph 5).

Issues: The main question involves compliance with court directives.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized adherence to procedural norms and the necessity of surrendering before trial (paragraph 5).

Result: The Crl.M.C is dismissed, allowing for the petitioner to file anew post-surrender.

Table of Content
1. non-compliance led to dismissal of request. (Para 5)

O R D E R Dated this the 28th day of January 2026 The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash Annexure A2 final report and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 235/2015 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mannarkkad.

3. When the Crl.M.C came up for consideration

19.11.2025, this Court considering the fact that the petitioner has been absconding for more than a decade and the case against him is pending in the Long Pending Register, directed the petitioner to surrender before the jurisdictional court within a week from the date of order and file applications to recall the warrant and get himself enlarged on bail and, thereafter, move the Crl.M.C. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 7.

5. It is an undisputed fact that, despite the above order, the petitioner has not surrendered before the Trial Court and got himself enlarged on bail. In light of the non-compliance of the order dated 19.11.2025, I am not inclined to exercise the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure .

In the result, the Crl.M.C is dismissed, but without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file a fresh Crl.M.C on the same cause of action, after the petitioner surrenders before the Trial Court and get himself enlarged on bail.

SD/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top