Banwari Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2761 MP

                                           1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     AT GWALIOR
                          BEFORE
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
               ON THE 15th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
           MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2026 of 2023


       BETWEEN:-

       BANWARI YADAV S/O SHRI RAMDAYAL
       YADAV, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, VILLAGE
       SHRIPURA POST KAKRAUAA (MADHYA
       PRADESH



                                                               ........PETITIONERS
       (BY SHRI ABHISHEK SINGH- ADVOCATE)

       AND

1.     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
       INCHARGE POLICE STATION THROUGH
       POLICE STATION GOVERDHAN (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

2.     MAHESH ADIWASI S/O SHRI MURARI
       ADIWASI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
       OCCUPATION: LABOUR VILLAGE
       SHRIPURA TEHSIL POHARI , THANA
       GOBERDHAN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                               ........RESPONDENT

       (BY SHRI PRAMOD PACHORI- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the
following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                      ORDER

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of CrPC for quashment of FIR vide Crime No.113 of 2021 dated 21.12.2021 registered at Police Station Goverdhan, Shivpuri for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 294, 506 of IPC and 3(1) (n) 3(1)(/k) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act on the ground of compromise.

During pendency of this petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, the petitioner and respondent No.2 have filed joint application along with affidavit of complainant stating that the dispute between the parties has been resolved and they are not inclined to pursue the matter any more.

By the rival parties, application along with affidavit has been filed bearing IA No.915 of 2023 informing about the parties having entered into compromise with no intention to pursue the matter further.

The Principal Registrar of this Court has duly verified the factum of compromise, contents of the application, affidavits, intent and signatures of the parties. Report dated 02-02-2023 is attached and perused. Compromise has been arrived at between the parties 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, and 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.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the FIR has been

registered under SC/ST and the same cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise. He, however, accepts the factum of compromise having been entered into between the parties without coercion and duress.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramavtar V/s State of M.P. reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 966 has quashed the FIR lodged under the provisions of SC/ST Act by observing thus in Para Nos.12 to 16:-

"12. In view of the settled proposition of law, we affirm the decision of this Court in Ramgopal (Supra) and re-iterate that the powers of this Court under Article 142 can be invoked to quash a criminal proceeding on the basis of a voluntary compromise between the complainant/victim and the accused.

13. We, however, put a further caveat that the powers under Article 142 or under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are exercisable in post- conviction matters only where an appeal is pending before one or the other Judicial forum. This is on the premise that an order of conviction does not attain finality till the accused has exhausted his/her legal remedies and the finality is sub-judice before an appellate court. The pendency of legal proceedings, be that may before the final Court, is sine-qua-non to involve the superior court's plenary powers to do complete justice. Conversely, where a settlement has ensued post the attainment of all legal remedies, the annulment of proceedings on the basis of a compromise would be impermissible. Such an embargo is necessitated to prevent the accused from gaining an indefinite leverage, for such a settlement/compromise will always be loaded with lurking suspicion about its bona fide. We have already clarified that the purpose of these extra-ordinary powers is not to incentivise any hollow-hearted agreements between the accused and the victim but to do complete justice by effecting genuine settlement(s).

14. With respect to the second question before us, it must be noted that even though the powers of this Court under Article 142are wide and far-reaching, the same cannot be exercised in a vacuum. True it is that ordinary statutes or any restrictions contained therein, cannot be constructed as a limitation on the Court's power to do "complete justice". However, this is not to say that this Court can altogether ignore the statutory provisions or other express prohibitions in law. In fact, the Court is obligated to take note of the relevant laws and will have to regulate the use of its power and discretion accordingly. The Constitution Bench decision in the case of Supreme Court Bar Assn Vs. Union of India has eloquently clarified this point as follows:

"48. The Supreme Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 142 has the power to make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice "between the parties in any cause or matter pending before it". The very nature of the power must lead the Court to set limits for itself within which to exercise those powers and ordinarily it cannot disregard a statutory provision governing a subject, except perhaps to balance the equities between the conflicting claims of the litigating parties by "ironing out the creases" in a cause or matter before it. Indeed this Court is not a court of restricted jurisdiction of only dispute- settling. It is well recognised and established that this Court has always been a law- maker and its role travels beyond merely dispute-settling. It is a "problem- solver in the nebulous areas" (see K. Veeraswami Vs. Union of India [(1991) 3 SCC 655 : 1991 SCC (Cri) 734] but the substantive statutory provisions dealing with the subject-matter of a given case cannot be altogether ignored by this Court, while making an order under Article 142. Indeed, these constitutional powers cannot, in any way, be controlled by any statutory provisions but at the same time these powers are not meant to be exercised when their exercise may come directly in conflict with what has been expressly provided for in a statute dealing expressly with the subject."

15. Ordinarily, when dealing with offences arising out of special statutes such as the SC/ ST Act , the Court will be extremely circumspect in its approach. The SC/ ST Act has been specifically enacted to deter acts of indignity, humiliation and harassment against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.. The Act is also a recognition of the depressing reality that despite undertaking several measures, the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes continue to be subjected to various atrocities at the hands of upper-castes. The Courts have to be mindful of the fact that the Act has been enacted keeping in view the express constitutional safeguards enumerated in Articles 15, 17 and 21 of the Constitution, with a twin-fold objective of protecting the members of these vulnerable communities as well as to provide relief and rehabilitation to the victims of caste-based atrocities.

16. On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be

contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a 'special statute' would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482Cr.P.C."

The aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramavtar (Supra) settle the legal position in so far as, the power of this Court to quash proceedings of FIR (in exercise of powers contained under Section 482 of CrPC) is concerned in cases where the parties have entered into a compromise in the cases involving offences under the provisions of SC/ST Act. The only question which is required to be borne in mind is that the compromise must be dealt with free will.

In view of the aforesaid legal position and considering the submissions made on behalf of respective parties and in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Ramavtar (Supra), the FIR is liable to be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties.

Consequent upon the above said facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that accused petitioner and the complainant/respondent No.2 have amicably resolved the issue and the offences are being permitted to be compounded with the permission of the Court, accordingly, I.A.No.915 of 2023 stands allowed and this Court allows this MCRC with following observation:-

FIR vide Crime No.113 of 2021 dated 21-12-2021 registered at Police Station Goverdhan Shivpuri for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 294, 506 of IPC and 3(1) (n) 3(1)(/k) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act is hereby quashed.

Petition stands disposed of. No order as to cost.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Police Station for information and compliance.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE ojha

Digitally signed by YOGENDRA OJHA Date: 2023.02.15 18:27:18 +05'30'