Haidar Khan Abbasi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1468 MP

                                1
                                         M.Cr.C. No. 63191/2021
                       (Haidar Khan Abbasi Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)

          HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                BENCH AT GWALIOR

                         SINGLE BENCH:


         Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 63191/2021
                       Haidar Khan Abbasi
                               Vs.
                       State of M.P. & Anr.
                    ********************
CORAM

         Hon. Shri Justice Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava

                    ********************
Appearance

      Shri Ayush Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner.
      Ms. Upendri Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent

No.1/State.

      Shri F.A. Shah, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

                    ********************
Reserved on                     : 27/01/2022
Whether approved for reporting : No


                           ORDER

(Passed on 02/02/2022)

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure (for brevity "CrPC") has been filed for quashing the

FIR registered in Crime No. 661/2021 at Police Station Janakganj,

M.Cr.C. No. 63191/2021 (Haidar Khan Abbasi Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)

District Gwalior for the offences punishable under Sections 420,

409 of IPC and all other consequential proceedings on the basis of

compromise.

2. Along with the petition, I.A. No. 33588/2021 & I.A. No.

33589/2021 have also been filed by the petitioner and

complainant-respondents No.2 respectively. The applications are

duly signed by both the parties and are supported by affidavits of

respective parties.

3. In compliance of order dated 22/12/2021 passed by this

Court, the factum of compromise has been verified by the

Principal Registrar of this Court, who has recorded statement of

complainant/ respondents No.2- Pawan Devnani S/o Shri Baldev

Devnani as well as petitioner/accused, namely, Haidar Khan S/o

Shri Quamaruddin and has submitted a report that the parties have

arrived at compromise voluntarily without any threat, inducement

and coercion. The verification report further states that as per

Section 320 of CrPC, the offence under Section 420 of IPC is

compoundable, but offence under Section 409 of IPC is not

compoundable.

4. The facts of the case, in short, are that the petitioner and

respondent No.2 were known to each other since long but they

were not in regular touch. On 11/01/2021, when they meet after

long duration of time, petitioner offered respondent No.2 to join

M.Cr.C. No. 63191/2021 (Haidar Khan Abbasi Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)

his business by giving lured promises. Respondent No.2/

complainant fall prey in attractive offer extended by the petitioner

who according to the complainant also pretended himself as

authorized agent of ADC India Fishery & Trading (OPC) Private

Limited and invested amount of Rs.3,05,000/-. Thereafter, on

01/08/2021, respondent No.2 came to know through a newspaper

that the company in which he invested the money has flee away

and owner of the company has been arrested. When the

complainant contacted to the petitioner, he did not give any

satisfactory reply and said that he has nothing to do with the

money of complainant. Being aggrieved and left with no other

option, respondent No.2 lodged the FIR which has been registered

as Crime No. 661/2021 at Police Station Janakganj, District

Gwalior, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 409 of IPC.

5. Thereafter, during pendency of investigation, by the

intervention of respectful members of the society, the petitioner

and respondent No.2 have cleared bilateral doubts and respondent

No.2 has expressed his desire not to continue with the case against

the petitioner. Hence, this petition has been filed for quashing the

aforesaid FIR and all other consequential proceedings arising out

of it on the basis of compromise.

6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the

respondent No.2/complainant has entered into a compromise with

M.Cr.C. No. 63191/2021 (Haidar Khan Abbasi Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)

the petitioner and therefore, the present petition has been filed for

compounding the offences on the basis of compromise. It is

further submitted that if the FIR indicates a dispute between the

complainant and accused which was of a private nature and

once the complainant has decided not to pursue the matter

further, then the High Court could have taken a mere pragmatic

view of the matter. The criminal cases involving offences which

arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or

similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour, may in

appropriate situation fall for quashing where parties have settled

the dispute and the criminal proceedings can be quashed on the

basis of compromise even where non-compoundable offences

are involved. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon

the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of

Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303], Narinder

Singh & Anr. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. [(2014) 6 SCC 466],

and judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on

29/09/2021 in the case of Ramgopal & Anr. Vs. State of Madhya

Pradesh [Criminal Appeal No.1489/2012]. On the basis of

aforesaid facts of the case and in the light of above cited

judgments, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for allowing

this petition by quashing the FIR in question and all consequential

proceedings arising out of it.

M.Cr.C. No. 63191/2021 (Haidar Khan Abbasi Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)

7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2/

complainant has no objection to the prayer made on behalf of

the petitioner in regarding the quashment of FIR as well as other

consequential criminal proceedings.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

documents available on record as well as verification report

submitted by Principal Registrar of this Court.

9. Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as

under:-

"482. Saving for inherent power of High Court - Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice."

10. The powers of High Court under Section 482 of CrPC are

partly administrative and partly judicial. The Hon'ble Apex Court

in State of Karnataka vs. Muniswami [AIR 1977 SC 1489] held

that the section envisages three circumstances in which the

inherent jurisdiction may be exercised, namely, "to give effect to

an order under CrPC, to prevent abuse of the process of the court,

and to secure the ends of justice."

11. The jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC is discretionary.

The Court may depend upon the facts of a given case. Court can

always take note of any miscarriage of justice and prevent the

M.Cr.C. No. 63191/2021 (Haidar Khan Abbasi Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)

same by exercising its powers under Section 482 of CrPC. It is

true that their powers are neither limited nor curtailed by any other

provisions of the Code. However, such inherent powers are to be

exercised sparingly and with caution.

12. It is also settled law that the inherent power under Section

482 of CrPC has to be exercised for the ends of the justice and

should not be arbitrarily exercised to cut short the normal process

of a criminal trial.

13. It is apparent from the perusal of verification report

submitted by the Principal Registrar that the offence under Section

420 of IPC is compoundable but offence under Section 409 of IPC

is not compoundable. Therefore, taking into consideration the

overall facts & circumstances of the case as well as considering

the nature and gravity of offence, it would not be appropriate to

quash the FIR for the offence under Section 409 of IPC.

14. Consequently, this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is

partly allowed and the FIR registered in Crime No. 661/2021 at

Police Station Janakganj, District Gwalior and all proceedings

flowing from it so far as it relates to offence under Section 420 of

IPC against the petitioner is hereby quashed and the petitioner is

acquitted from Section 420 of IPC on the basis of compromise

arrived at between the parties.

15. Accordingly, the trial Court is directed to continue the trial

M.Cr.C. No. 63191/2021 (Haidar Khan Abbasi Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.)

against the petitioner for the remaining offence i.e. Section 409 of

IPC, in accordance with law.

16. With aforesaid observation, present petition stands disposed

of.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned

for information and necessary compliance.

(Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava) Judge Shubhankar* Digitally signed by SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Date: 2022.02.02 15:57:53 +05'30'