Madhya Pradesh High Court
Akhandpratap Singh Rathor vs M/S Agrawal And Braders Through ... on 22 December, 2023
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
ON THE 22 nd OF DECEMBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56470 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
AKHANDPRATAP SINGH RATHOR S/O LATE SUGHAR
SINGH RATHORE, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: GOVT. EMPLOYEE CHHUTTA KI
BAZARIYA IDGARH KAMPOO GWALIOR AT PRESENT
H.NO. 225 NEW COLONY NO 2 BIRLA NAGAR DISTRICT
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONE
BY SHRI AJAY BHARGAWA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. M/S AGRAWAL AND BRADERS THROUGH
PROPRIETER ANAND KUMAR AGRAWAL S/O
SHRI RAMDAYAL AGRAWAL, AGED ABOUT 54
YEARS, LALITPUR COLONY LASHKAR DISTRICT
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE STATE OF MP (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AWDHESH PARASHAR - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1)
(BY SHRI RAJIV UPADHYAY - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE
RESPONDENT NO.2)
This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
1 . The present petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been
preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 23.11.2015 passed by the
11th Additional Session Judge, Gwalior in Criminal Appeal No.480/2015,
whereby order dated 16.09.2015 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Gwalior has been confirmed.
2 . Both the parties have filed application vide I.A. No.23167/2023
which is an application under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
read with Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. to compromise the matter.
3 . From the perusal said application, it appears that compromise is
reached between the parties because petitioner has made a demand draft bearing
No.066654 of Rs.5,50,000/- in favour of respondent which has also been
received by him. Thus, parties decided not to prosecute the case and they want
to give peace chance by settling the matter once and for all.
4. A Lean Compromise is better than a Fat Law Suit, instant efforts
of the parties indicate the same. It is expected that their bonafide gestures would
continue.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of judgments 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, Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of
Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466, B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana
and another (2003) 4 SCC 675, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10
SCC 303 and Parbatbhai Ahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur
and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641 , 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.
6 . After hearing 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 trial in such matter will be a futile exercise which will serve no purpose
particularly when matter pertains to Negotiable Instruments Act. 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.
7 . Thus, in the interest of justice, application for compounding the
offence vide I.A.No.23167/2023 i s allowed because no fruitful purpose
would be served in continuation of trial. Thus, parties are permitted to
compound the offences.
8. Resultantly, the petition is allowed. Order dated 23.11.2015 and
16.09.2015 are hereby set aside and criminal proceedings against the petitioner
are hereby quashed. Petitioner is discharged from the aforesaid offence.
9. Petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms.
10. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
11. Certified copy as per rules.
(ANAND PATHAK)
JUDGE
Rashid
