Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shridharlal Ateriya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 December, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
Bench: Sanjeev S. Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT G WA L I O R
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S. KALGAONKAR
MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL CASE NO. 50665 OF 2023
BETWEEN:-
SHRIDARLAL ATERIYA, SON OF LATE RAMHET LAL
ATERIYA, AGE 60YEARS, OCCUPATION- GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEE, RESIDENT OF SABALGARH, DISTRICT
MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI HARISH SHARMA- ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER)
AND
1. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH : POLICE
STATION PADAV, DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ABHIYOKTRI THROUGH SARPARST MAMA SHRI
ABHIDEV KUMAR SON OF SHRI ROSHANLAL, AGE 25
YEAS, OCCUPATION- LABOURER, RESIDENT OF WARD
NO. 42, SURESIYA HANUMANGARH (RAJASTHAN)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PURUSHOTTAM TANWAR- PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1-
STATE AND SHRI SHYAM KISHORE MISHRA- ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT NO.2)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserved on : 14.12.2023
Pronounced on : 21.12.2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This revision having been heard and reserved for judgment,
coming on for pronouncement this day, Justice Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
pronounced the following:
2
ORDER
This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the
petitioner seeking quashment of FIR pertaining to Crime No.365 of 2023
registered by PS Padav, District Gwalior for offences punishable under
Sections 376, 506 of IPC and under Section 3/4 of POCSO Act with all
consequential proceedings thereto, on the basis of compromise arrived at
between the parties.
(2) As per case of prosecution, victim aged around 17 years, submitted a
written complaint before PS Padav, District Gwalior on 12.07.2023 to the
effect that she is resident of District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan and she
knew the present petitioner for the last few days whereas he is known to
her maternal aunt (mami) for the last two years. The petitioner had asked
her to come to Gwalior on the pretext of getting her job. He also got a
room booked in Royal Hotel for her and her maternal aunt. She along with
her mama and mami stayed at Royal Hotel on 07.07.2023. The petitioner
Shridhar committed rape on her, when her mama and mami had gone out
for some work. Thereafter, Shridhar threatened her of dire consequences
including infamy in the society. Fearing social indignation, she did not tell
the incident to anybody. On 11-07-2023, when she was in affliction, her
aunt enquired from her. She disclosed entire incident to her maternal Aunt.
On the basis of written complaint, FIR was registered at Crime No.365 of
2023 by PS Padav, District Gwalior against petitioner for offences
punishable under Sections 376, 506 of IPC and under Section 3/4 of
POCSO Act against petitioner. Relevant seizure has been made. Statements
of victim under Sections 161 and 164 of CrPC and statement of her
maternal aunt (mami) and uncle under Section 161 of CrPC were recorded.
(3) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a
Government servant, aged around 60 years. He has not committed any
offence. He is falsely implicated in the instant case on his refusal to
blackmail and extortion of money by the prosecutrix and her aunt. Present
case is nothing but the counter-blast to the written complaint dated 11-07-
2023 submitted before PS Padav by the petitioner against the victim, her
maternal aunt and uncle alleging that they illegally extorted an amount of
Rs. 5 lac from him. He was threatened with false implication in rape case.
The entire monetary transaction had taken place through online banking
which clearly goes to show that the present case has been falsely lodged
against the petitioner in order to satisfy their grudge. Referring to FIR at
Crime No.364 of 2023 registered at P.S. Padav, for offene punishable U/s
384, 389 and 34 of IPC against Suman and Abhidev and victim, learned
counsel submits that the investigation into allegation of extortion is
underway against the victim and her maternal uncle and aunt. Learned
counsel further contends that the prosecution against petitioner stands
falsified in view of the DNA report dated 31.08.2023 wherein, it is opined
that no male DNA is found in the source samples taken from the victim.
Still in view of the amicable settlement, he does not wish to pursue the
prosecution in Crime No.364/2023.
(4) Learned counsel for the State opposes the petition for compromise
on the ground of gravity of alleged offence, but fairly concedes that the
DNA fingerprinting report does not support the allegation of sexual
assault.
(5) During pendency of this petition, IA No.20207 of 2023 under
Section 320(2) of CrPC has been moved stating therein that the parties
have settled the dispute amicably and now they do not wish to pursue the
matter any further. Aforesaid IA is supported by affidavits of petitioner,
complainant and her legal guardians (maternal uncle and aunt). In support
of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon
the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 10th August, 2022 in
Cr.Appeal No.1217 of 2022 (Kapil Gupta Vs. State of NCT of Delhi and
Another) and by Indore Bench of this Court dated 12th October, 2023 in
M.Cr.C.No.10137 of 2023 (Rohit Vs. State of M.P and Another). Learned
counsel further submits that parties have decided not to pursue the case
lodged against the prosecutrix by the petitioner in Crime No. 365 of 2023.
Thus, it is requested that FIR in both the matters be quashed.
(6) In compliance of the order dated 07-11-2023 passed by this Court,
the factum of compromise has been verified by the Principal Registrar of
this Court, who has recorded the statements of petitioner, victim-
respondent No.2 as well as of legal guardians of victim and has submitted
a report dated 21-11-2023 that the parties have arrived at compromise
voluntarily without any threat, inducement or coercion.
(7) 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, the
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 and utilized in other material
cases.
(8) 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 this matter will be a futile exercise which
will serve no purpose. In the obtaining facts and circumstances of the case,
Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be justifiably invoked to prevent abuse of the
process of law and wasteful exercise by the Courts below.
(9) Consequently, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in
cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 302 and
Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466, Ram
Gopal and Another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh vide order dated
29.09.2021 passed in CRA No.1489/2012, this Court allows this I.A.
No.20207/2023 and in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of
CrPC directs FIR pertaining to Crime No.365 of 2023 registered by PS
Padav, District Gwalior for offences punishable under Sections 376, 506 of
IPC and under Section 3/4 of POCSO Act are hereby quashed with all
consequential proceedings thereto.
This petition filed under Section 482 of CrPC stands disposed of in
the aforesaid terms.
Certified copy as per rules.
(SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
Rks/Avi
VIJAY
TRIPA
2.5.4.20=663cb09dd950bfc3ea7ed
4f02d97ddae5364f1d4b042dbc599
21b76e812d2d6b,
postalCode=474001, st=Madhya
Pradesh,
THI
serialNumber=58392D8C4E7C9693
BFEEB5B46B3CA006F1127E890089
52BBEC528CE4D82551BD,
cn=VIJAY TRIPATHI
Date: 2023.12.21 19:00:51 +05'30'
