Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arun Kumar Pal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 June, 2023
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON THE 28 th OF JUNE, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 21733 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
ARUN KUMAR PAL S/O SHRI RAMESH PAL, AGED
ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR RESIDENT OF
GRAM DHUTA RAMPURA, JALON, (UTTAR PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI RAVI BALLABH TRIPATHI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
PETITIONER)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
POLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE STATION
RAON DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. ANJANI PAL W/O SHRI ARUN KUMAR PAL,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HOUSEWIFE RESIDENT OF GRAM DHUTA
RAMPURA JALON U.P. AT PRESENT R/O AT
KHARAJPURA, RAJPUR DIST. PATIALA (PUNJAB)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI VPS TOMAR- LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPNDENT NO.1-
STATE AND SHRI ANAND SINGH SIKARWAR- LEARNED COUNSEL FOR
THE RESPONDENT NO.2- COMPLAINANT)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
Applicant has filed this petition under Section 482 of CrPC for
quashment of FIR dated 26-02-2017 registered vide Crime No.45 of 2017 at
Police Station Raun, District Bhind for the offences punishable under Section
363 of IPC, enhanced Sections 366-A, 368 of IPC read with Section 3(2)(v-a)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 6/28/2023
5:46:23 PM
of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act) as
well as other consequential criminal proceedings arising of aforesaid crime
pending before the Court of Special Judge Judge (Atrocities), Bhind in Special
Sessions Trial No.160 of 2019 o n account of settling the dispute as the
compromise arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no.2.
This court, vide order dated 14-06-2023, had directed the parties to
appear before the Principal Registrar of this Court for recording their statements
and for verification of factum of compromise. The Principal Registrar has
submitted his report on 14-06-2023 itself and verified the factum of
compromise.
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,
Anita Maria Dias and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. (2018) 3
SCC 290, 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.
By relying upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Mafat Lal and Another vs. State of Rajasthan (2022) 6 SCC 589, it is
submitted by Shri Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner that once
abductee has clearly stated that she was in love with the petitioner and she left
her home as per her own will and volition and she married the petitioner on her
own free will without any influence being exercised by petitioner and both the
couple is having a child out of their wedlock, therefore, looking to the future of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 6/28/2023
5:46:23 PM
child and their matrimonial life, since complainant is not intended to continue
the matter, in such a situation, petitioner should be permitted to compound
offence.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account
the law laid down by the Apex Court the above-cited cases as well as law laid
down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Mafat Lal (supra), 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. Since complainant is not intended to
continue matter, petitioner is permitted to compound offence.
Consequent upon the above said facts and that the accused petitioner
and the victim have amicably resolved the issue and they are permitted to
compound the offence, this Court allows this MCRC with the following
directions :-
F IR dated 26-02-2017 registered vide Crime No.45 of 2017 at Police
Station Raun, District Bhind for the offences punishable under Section 363 of
IPC, enhanced Sections 366-A, 368 of IPC read with Section 3(2)(v-a) of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act) as well
as other consequential criminal proceedings arising of aforesaid crime pending
before the Court of Special Judge Judge (Atrocities), Bhind in Special Sessions
Trial No.160 of 2019 o n account of settling the dispute as the compromise
arrived at between the petitioner & respondent no.2 is hereby quashed.
Petitioner is discharged from the charges levelled against him.
Petition stands disposed of.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 6/28/2023
5:46:23 PM
No order as to cost.
Let a copy of this order be sent to concerned Police Station as well as
court concerned for information and compliance.
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE
MKB
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 6/28/2023
5:46:23 PM
