SHIYAS ISMAIL, AATHMAJ JOY, THANSEER MAKKAR V.M., JOYAL JOSE, IBRAHIMKUTTY ASHRAF, SAINUL ABIDEEN B, AJOBIN K JOMON, JOSHY MATHEW vs STATE OF KERALA

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9441

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
SHIYAS ISMAIL, AATHMAJ JOY, THANSEER MAKKAR V.M., JOYAL JOSE, IBRAHIMKUTTY ASHRAF, SAINUL ABIDEEN B, AJOBIN K JOMON, JOSHY MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.SHAHANAS SALMA ABBAS, SHRI.SIDHARTH T.
For the Respondents: SHRI.STEPHY K REGI SR PP, SMT SEETHA S

Table of Content
1. application of section 528 for quashing based on amicable settlement. (Para 2)
2. counsel submissions regarding the amicable resolution of disputes. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. court maintains authority to quash in lesser offences. (Para 6)
4. confirmation of inherent jurisdiction for non-serious offences. (Para 7)

O R D E R

Dated this the 11thday of February, 2026The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 8 in C.C.No.288/2022 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Idukki, which has arisen from Crime No.312/2022 registered by the Kanjikuzhy Police Station, Idukki, alleging the commission of the offences punishable underSections 143, 144, 146, 147, 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(i) read withSection 149of theIndian 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 2^nd respondent, who has executed Annexure-3 affidavit, affirming the settlement.

3. I have heard the learned Couns

Click Here to Read the rest of this document