Madhya Pradesh High Court
Zakir Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 July, 2021
Author: Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
-( 1 )- MCRC No. 28716/2021
Zakir Khan & Others vs. State of MP & Another
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
BENCH AT GWALIOR
(Single Bench)
Misc. Criminal Case No. 28716/2021
1. Zakir Khan
2. Sharafat Khan
3. Azad Khan @ Machlu Khan
4. Kabbal @ Fabbal Khan ..... PETITIONERS
Versus
1. State of MP
2. Farjana Khan ..... RESPONDENTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM
Hon. Shri Justice Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance
Shri Rajnish Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri R.K.Awasthi, Public Prosecutor for the respondent
No.1/State.
Shri Neeraj Dhamanya, Advocate for the respondent No.2-
Complainant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whether approved for Reporting : No
Reserved on : 26.06.2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
(Passed on 28th July, 2021)
This petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been
filed by the petitioner seeking quashment of the
impugned FIR dated 3.3.2021 at Crime No.026/2021
registered by Police Station Malanpur, District Bhind for
the offences punishable under Sections 323, 294, 506,
34 of IPC and thereafter added Section 326 of IPC and
-( 2 )- MCRC No. 28716/2021
Zakir Khan & Others vs. State of MP & Another
for dropping the proceeding as ST No. 220/2021 pending
in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Gohad, District
Bhind, on the basis of compromise arrived at between
the parties.
2. Along with the petition under Section 482 of CrPC,
both the parties have filed applications under Section
320 and Section 320(2) vide IAs No. 17149/2021 and
17447/2021 respectively, stating that the dispute
between the parties has been resolved and they have
entered into compromise with no intention to pursue the
matter further. Both the applications are supported by
affidavits of petitioner No.3/accused Azad Khan @
Machlu Khan and complainant-Farjana Khan and injured
Smt. Kallo Begum.
3. In compliance of the order dated 15.06.2021
passed by this Court, the factum of compromise has
been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court, who
has recorded statement of complainant/respondent No.2
Farjana Khan and injured Kallo Begum, as well as
petitioner No.1/accused Zakir Khan, petitioner
No.2/accused Sharafat Khan, petitioner No.3/accused
Ajad @ Machlu Khan and petitioner No.4/accused Kabbal
@ Fabbal Khan, and has submitted a report that the
parties have arrived at compromise voluntarily without
any fear or force. The verification report further states
that as per section 320 CrPC, the offences under Sections
323, 506, 34 of IPC are compoundable but the offences
under Sections 294 and 326 of IPC are not
compoundable.
-( 3 )- MCRC No. 28716/2021
Zakir Khan & Others vs. State of MP & Another
4. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that
the Hon'ble Apex Court has in catena of judgments held
that it is the judicial obligation of the Court to undo a
wrong in course of administration of justice or to prevent
continuation of unnecessary judicial process, hence on
the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties
of the present case, it is a fit case for exercising inherent
powers under Section 482 of CrPC to quash the FIR. It is
further submitted that it is settled principle of law that
when dispute is purely personal in nature and both the
parties are willing to resolve the dispute then the
compromise could have been considered and criminal
proceedings could have been quashed even in non-
compoundable offence. To buttress their submissions,
learned counsel for the parties have placed reliance on
the judgments in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of
Punjab and others [(2012) 10 SCC 303]; Narinder
Singh vs. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466]
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the available record.
6. In the cases of Jagdish Channa & others Vs.
State of Haryana & another (AIR 2008 SC 1968),
Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab (AIR 2008
SC 1969), Shiji Vs. Radhika & Another (2011) 10
SCC 705, and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of
Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466, Hon'ble Supreme Court has
laid down that even in non-compoundable cases on the
basis of compromise, criminal proceedings can be
quashed so that valuable time of the court can be saved
-( 4 )- MCRC No. 28716/2021
Zakir Khan & Others vs. State of MP & Another
and utilized in other material cases.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
and taking into account the law laid down by the Apex
Court, in the opinion of this court, continuance of the
prosecution in such matters will be a futile exercise which
will serve no purpose. Under such a situation, section
482 Cr.P.C. can be justifiably invoked to prevent abuse of
the process of law and wasteful exercise by the courts
below. More so, the offence in question is not against the
society but merely affect the victim.
8. Considering the fact that the complainant and
accused person have amicably resolved the issue and the
offences being compoundable with the permission of the
Court, this Court allows this MCRC with the direction that
the proceedings of Crime No.026/2021 registered by
Police Station Malanpur, District Bhind for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 294, 506, 34 of IPC and
thereafter added Section 326 of IPC and ST No.
220/2021 pending in the Court of Additional Sessions
Judge, Gohad, District Bhind are hereby quashed.
This petition filed under Section 482 of CrPC stands
disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava)
(yog) Judge.
ALOK KUMAR
2021.07.29
17:20:02
+05'30'
11.0.8
