Kerala High Court quashes fraud case against Nivin Pauly, Abrid Shine after settlement

The Kerala High Court quashed a criminal case registered against Malayalam actor Nivin Pauly and director Abrid Shine over allegations of fraud involving film producer PS Shamnas, following an amicable settlement between the parties. The court also quashed a separate criminal case against Shamnas over allegations that he forged Nivin’s signature on documents submitted to the Kerala Film Chamber of Commerce.

Justice PV Balakrishnan passed the order on October 26, noting that the parties had settled their disputes and no longer had any grievances against each other.

The case against Nivin and Shine was registered at Thalayolaparambu police station in Kottayam under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating), read with Section 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of a common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Shamnas, proprietor of Indian Movie Makers, had alleged that he suffered a financial loss after investing in the film Mahaveeryar and subsequently entering into an arrangement involving a sequel of Action Hero Biju.

According to his complaint, he invested Rs 3.5–4 crore in Mahaveeryar, which failed at the box office. He alleged that he was subsequently promised a co-producer role in Action Hero Biju 2 and a share of profits from its overseas rights.

Shamnas further alleged that details concerning the transfer of the film's rights were concealed from him and that an outdated agreement was used to sell the overseas rights to a Dubai-based company for Rs 5 crore, causing him wrongful loss. The allegations formed the basis of the criminal proceedings and were not findings established through a trial.

Nivin, in turn, filed a private complaint before a magistrate alleging that Shamnas had forged his signature. This led to the registration of a separate case by Palarivattom police in Ernakulam under Sections 465 (forgery) and 471 (using a forged document as genuine) of the IPC. Shamnas had approached the High Court seeking to quash that case as well.

In the petition filed by Nivin, the actor sought to quash the proceedings on the ground that the dispute with Shamnas had been settled.

Shamnas had also submitted an affidavit confirming the settlement and stating that he did not wish to pursue the case.

The public prosecutor confirmed that the settlement was genuine and bona fide and submitted that the State had no objection to quashing the proceedings.

Considering the submissions and the materials on record, Justice Balakrishnan observed that the parties had “amicably settled the disputes that led to the registration of the crime”.

The court further noted that the alleged offences were “not serious in nature” and “do not have a serious impact on society”.

It added that continuing the prosecution would serve no purpose, as “the chances of the petitioner getting convicted are bleak”.