Madhya Pradesh High Court
Laxman Kumar Malakar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 August, 2023
Author: Sunita Yadav
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
ON THE 4 th OF AUGUST, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 32281 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
LAXMAN KUMAR MALAKAR S/O SHRI LAXMIKANT
MALAKAR, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
LABOUR, R/O BAGDOR BEGUSARAY, BIHAR (BIHAR)
.....APPLICANT
(BY MR. RAJMANI BANSAL - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION GIRWAI, DISTRICT GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. PROSECUTRIX D/O JAGMOHAN KUSHWAH, AGED
ABOUT 16 YEARS, PANCHAYATI BHAWAN KE
PASS, MAHESHPURA, DISTRICT GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
( BY MR. DHEERAJ KUMAR BUDHOLIYA - PANEL LAWYER)
This application coming on for Admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of CrPC for
quashment of FIR at Crime No.04 of 2023 dated 06-01-2023 registered at
Police Station Girwai, District Gwalior for commission of offence under
Sections 363, 366-A and 376(2)(n) of IPC read with Section 5L/6 of POCSO
Act as well as quashment of subsequent criminal proceedings pending before
concerning trial Court, on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: LOKENDRA JAIN
Signing time: 8/5/2023
10:50:56 AM
Alongwith the petition, both the parties have filed I.A. No. 13472 of 2023
and 13473 of 2023 stating therein that the dispute between the parties has been
resolved and they have entered into compromise with no intention to pursue the
matter further.
I n compliance of order dated 26/07/2023 passed by this Court, the
factum of compromise has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this
Court, who has recorded the statements of complainant - respondents No. 2 as
well as petitioner - accused person and has submitted the report that the parties
have arrived at compromise voluntarily without any threat, inducement and
coercion.
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,
a nd Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466,
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 and utilised in other material cases.
It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on basis of oral
complaint made by father of prosecutrix before SHO concerned, the impugned
FIR has been lodged against the petitioner. Now, after compromise arrived at
between the parties, prosecutrix is residing happily with petitioner because of
solemnization of their marriage. It is further submitted that Hon'ble Supreme
Court as well as other High Courts have already quashed the FIR and criminal
proceedings in POCSO case where victim was minor at the time of incident and
got married with accused out of her own sweet will and is living a happy
Signature Not Verified
married life with him. In similar matter like present one, recently the High Court
Signed by: LOKENDRA JAIN
Signing time: 8/5/2023
10:50:56 AM
of Judicature of Rajasthan at Jodhpur in SB Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6323
of 2022 [Tarun Vaishnav vs.State of Rajasthan through PP and Another]
vide order dated 13-10-2022 has quashed FIR and other criminal
proceedings on the basis of compromise, against which the State filed an SLP
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed
the same vide order dated 03-03-2023 passed in Petition (s) for Special Leave
to Appeal (Crl) No. 1890 of 2023.
O n the other hand, counsel for the State opposed the contentions of
petitioner's counsel and submitted that at this stage, the FIR and other criminal
proceedings could not be quashed. Fact of amicable settlement or compromise
between the parties can be a relevant factor for purpose of reduction of
quantum of sentence of convict even in serious non-compoundable offence.
Permission for compounding of offence involving POCSO Act cannot be
granted. In support of his contention, he has relied on the judgments of
Supreme Court in the matter of Murali vs. State Represented by Inspector
of Police (2021) 1 SCC 726 and Pravat Chandra Mohanty vs. State of
Odisha and Another (2021) 3 SCC 529.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
In view of the above facts and circumstances and taking into account the
law laid down by Hon'ble 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.
Considering the fact that the respondent No. 2 - complainant and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: LOKENDRA JAIN
Signing time: 8/5/2023
10:50:56 AM
petitioner - accused have amicably resolved the issue, this Court allows this
MCRC with the following direction:-
1. FIR dated 06/01/2023 bearing Crime No.04/2023
registered at Police Station Girwai, District Gwalior (M.P.)
for the offence under Sections 363, 366-A and 376(2)(n) of
IPC and Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act against the petitioner
is hereby quashed.
2. All the consequential proceedings flowing out of the said
FIR also stand quashed.
Petition stands disposed of. No order as to cost.
(SUNITA YADAV)
JUDGE
(LJ*)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: LOKENDRA JAIN
Signing time: 8/5/2023
10:50:56 AM
