Madhya Pradesh High Court
Yash Namdeo vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 April, 2023
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 21 st OF APRIL, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 16818 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. YASH NAMDEO S/O SHRI BANSILAL TAILOR,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE
R/O 128, MG ROAD INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. MS. NEHA BANSAL D/O SHRI BALKISHAN
BANSAL OCCUPATION: DIRECTOR , LENSKART
SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. VI- JOHN TOWER, 393,
PHASE-III, UDYOG VIHAR, GURUGRAM,
HARYANA (HARYANA)
3. SAMEER CHOPRA S/O SHRI RAMESH CHOPRA
OCCUPATION: CFO, LENSCKART, SOLUTIONS
PVT. LTD. VI- JOHN TOWER, 393, PHASE-III,
UDYOG VIHAR, GURUGRAM, HARYANA
(HARYANA)
4. SUNIL MENON S/O SHRI KBS MANI OCCUPATION:
EXPANSION HEAD, LENSKART SOLUTIONS PVT.
LTD. VI- JOHN TOWER, 393, PHASE-III, UDYOG
VIHAR, GURUGRAM, HARYANA (HARYANA)
5. MANISH SHARMA S/O SHRI NARENRA UMAR
SHARMA OCCUPATION: BUSINES HEAD,
LENSKART SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. VI- JOHN
TOWER, 393, PHASE-III, UDYOG VIHAR,
GURUGRAM, HARYANA (HARYANA)
6. PRASHANT SHARMA S/O DR. S.G. SHARMA
OCCUPATION: AVP FINANCE, LENSKART
SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. VI- JOHN TOWER, 393,
PHASE-III, UDYOG VIHAR, GURUGRAM,
HARYANA (HARYANA)
7. RUCHIN SHARMA S/O SURESH SHARMA
OCCUPATION: AVP FINACE, LENSKART
SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. VI- JOHN TOWER, 393,
PHASE-III, UDYOG VIHAR, GURUGRAM,
HARYANA (HARYANA)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SOURABH
YADAV
Signing time: 21/04/2023
6:25:44 PM
2
8. SHAIL PATEL S/O SHRI AKHIL KANTILAL PATEL
OCCUPATION: AREA MANAGER, LENSKART
SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. VI- JOHN TOWER, 393,
PHASE-III, UDYOG VIHAR, GURUGRAM,
HARYANA (HARYANA)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI AJAY MISHRA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
CRIME BRANCH, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. LENSCARE THROUGH ISRSHAD KHAN 280,
ANOOP NAGAR, GALI NO. 7, PALASIA, INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI H.S RATHORE - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This application coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is an application filed under section 482 of the Cr.P.C for modification
in the last para of order dated 11.04.2023 passed in M.Cr.C No.41183/2023,
whereby in the last para of the order due to typographical mistake instead of
quashing of the FIR, the order of acquittal got passed.
In view of the aforesaid, the present application is allowed and the order
dated 11.04.2023 passed in M.Cr.C No.41183/2023 is modified. The last para
of the order shall be read as under:-
"In view of the above, it would be apposite to survey the law in respect of
compounding in non-compoundable case. The Apex Court in the case of
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC
303 after considering the the provisions of section 320 and 482 of the
Cr.P.C held that the compounding can he permitted in a non-
compoundable offence. Relevant part of the order of the order reads as
under :-
"Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of
settlement between an offender and victim is not the same thing as
compounding of offence. They are different and not interchangeable.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SOURABH
YADAV
Signing time: 21/04/2023
6:25:44 PM
Strictly speaking, the power of compounding of offences given to a
court under Section 320 is materially different from the quashing of
criminal proceedings by the High Court in exercise of its inherent
jurisdiction. In compounding of offences, power of a criminal court
is circumscribed by the provisions contained in Section 320 and the
court is guided solely and squarely thereby while, on the other hand,
the formation of opinion by the High Court for quashing a criminal
offence or criminal proceeding or criminal complaint is guided by the
material on record as to whether the ends of justice would justify
such exercise of power although the ultimate consequence may be
acquittal or dismissal of indictment. B.S.Joshi, Nikhil Merchant,
Manoj Sharma and Shiji do illustrate the principle that the High Court
may quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint in exercise of
its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code and Section 320
does not limit or affect the powers of the High Court under Section
482. Can it be said that by quashing criminal proceedings in
B.S.Joshi, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma and Shiji this Court has
compounded the non-compoundable offences indirectly? We do not
think so. There does exist the distinction between compounding of
an offence under Section 320 and quashing of a criminal case by the
High Court in exercise of inherent power under Section 482. The two
powers are distinct and different although the ultimate consequence
may be the same viz. acquittal of the accused or dismissal of
indictment."
In a subsequent order, in the case of Narinder Singh and Ors Vs.
State of Punjab and Anr. passed in Criminal Appeal No.686/2014 dated
27.03.2014 after relying on the judgment passed in the case of Gian Singh
(supra), the Apex Court permitted the compounding in a non-
compoundable case and quashed the criminal proceedings.
In the case of Daxaben vs. State of Gujarat (Arising out of SLP
(Crl.) No.1132-1155 of 2022) , the Apex Court held that the inherent
power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is wide and can
even be exercised to quash criminal proceedings relating to non-
compoundable offences, to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse
of the process of Court. Where the victim and offender have
compromised disputes essentially civil and personal in nature, the High
Court can exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash
the criminal proceedings.
In the case of Yogendra Yadav & Ors. vs. The State of Jharkhand
& Anr. AIR 2015 SC (Criminal) 166, the Apex Court held as under:-
"Needless to say that offences which are non-compoundable
cannot be compound by the Court. Courts draw the power of
compounding offences from Section 320 of the Code. The said
provision has to be strictly followed (Gian Singh V. State of Punjab).
However, in a given case, the High Court can quash a criminal
proceeding in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code
having regard to the fact that the parties have amicably settled their
disputes and the victim has no objection, even though the offences
are non-compoundable. In which cases the High Court can exercise
its iscretion to quash the proceedings will depend on facts and
circumstances of each case. Offences which involve moral turpitude,
grave offences like rape, murder etc. cannot be effaced by quashing
the proceedings because that will have harmful effect on the society.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SOURABH
YADAV
Signing time: 21/04/2023
6:25:44 PM
Such offences cannot be said to be restricted to two individuals or
two groups. If such offences are quashed, it may sent wrong signal
to the society. However, when the High Court is convinced that the
offences are entirely personal in nature and, therefore, do not affect
public peace or tranquility and where it feels that quashing of such
proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace
and would secure ends of justice, it should not hesitate to quash
them. In such cases, the prosecution becomes a lame prosecution.
Pursuing such a lame prosecution would be waste of time and
energy. That will also unsettle the compromise and obstruct
restoration of peace."
In Yogendra Yadav's case (supra), charges were under Sections 307
& 326 IPC. The apex Court was of the view that the High Court could
have exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. because
parties have amicably settled the dispute and the case did not pertain to an
offence of moral turpitude or grave offences like rape, murder etc.
In the case of Ramgopla & Anr. vs. State of MP (Criminal Appeal
No.1489/2012, decided on September 29, 2021), the Apex Court held
in para12 as under:-
''12. The High Court, therefore, having regard to the nature of the
offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute
and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal
proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are non
compoundable. The High Court can indubitably evaluate the
consequential effects of the offence beyond the body of an
individual and therefore, adopt a pragmatic approach, to ensure that
the felony, even if goes unpunished, does not tinker with or paralyze
the very object of the administration of criminal justice system.''
In the case of State of M.P. vs. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688, a
Three Judge Bench of the Apex Court discussed the earlier judgments of
the Apex Court and laid down the principles in para-15. The relevant para-
15.1 & 15.2 are reproduced as under:-
''15.1 That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to
quash the criminal proceedings for the non- compoundable offences
under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having
overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly
those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of
matrimonial relationship or
family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute
amongst themselves;
15.2. Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions
which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or
offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not
private in nature and have a serious impact on society.''
In the case of Jaswant Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr., Criminal
Appeal No.1233 of 2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.7072 of 2021
decided on 20.10.2021), the Apex Court held in para 61 that criminal
cases having overwhelmingly and predominating civil flavour stand on a
different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences
arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such
like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SOURABH
YADAV
Signing time: 21/04/2023
6:25:44 PM
dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or
personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute, the
proceedings can be quashed in exercise of the powers under Section 482
of the Cr.P.C. in non-compoundable cases on the basis of compounding.
Considering the aforesaid facts and taking into consideration the
settlement between the accused persons and the complainant that they
have amicably settled their dispute and are leading peaceful life, no
purpose would be served in continuing the criminal proceedings after a
period of more than 10 years.
In view of the above, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is
allowed and the proceedings pursuant to crime no.0025/2022 registered at
police station Crime Branch, Indore is quashed."
With the aforesaid modification, the present application is allowed.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
Sourabh
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SOURABH
YADAV
Signing time: 21/04/2023
6:25:44 PM
