Dataram Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 7834 MP

                                                              1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT GWALIOR
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
                                                 ON THE 12 th OF MAY, 2023
                                         MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 17429 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          DATARAM YADAV S/O SHRI RAMOJ SINGH, AGED 56
                          YEAR S, OCCUPATION: GOVT JOB R/O NEAR ARMY
                          SCHOOL GATE NO 2 BANK COLONY BADAGAON
                          DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....APPLICANT
                          (BY SHRI ALOK KUMAR SHARMA- ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                POLICE STATION ATER DISTRICT BHIND
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    JASHRAM SINGH S/O SHRI BANKE SINGH, AGED
                                62   YEARS, R/O VILLAGE JAMSARA POLICE
                                STATION ATER DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI DINESH SAVITA- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
                          (MS. ANITA LODHI- ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2)

                                This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                              ORDER

With consent heard finally.

By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties, the petitioner has prayed for qushment of complaint vide Crime No.166/2017 registered at Police Station Ater, District Bhind for the offence under Sections Signature Not Verified Signed by: VISHAL UPADHYAY Signing time: 5/15/2023 12:25:50 PM

308, 294, 506, 147, 148, 149 of IPC and other consequential proceedings.

It appears that parties agreed to settle the matter and therefore, applications vide I.A.No.7220/2023 and I.A No.7221/2023 have been jointly preferred at the instance of parties and they want to settle the matter. Applications are duly signed by respective parties and same is supported by their affidavits.

T h e Principal Registrar of this Court has duly verified the parties, contents of application, intent and signatures of parties. Report is attached, same is perused and it appears that compromise has been reached between the parties voluntarily without any threat, inducement and coercion.

Learned counsel for the respondent No.1/State opposed the prayer and prayed for rejection of the petition.

Counsel for the complainant argued in support of petitioners' prayer for compromise. He referred affidavit filed by the complainant and is ready to settle the matter.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents appended thereto.

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.

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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: VISHAL UPADHYAY Signing time: 5/15/2023 12:25:50 PM

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.

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. 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.

To preserve the resources and bonhomie created between the parties arises out of settlement, in the interest of justice, applications for compounding the offence vide I.A.No.7220/2023 and I.A No.7221/2023 are allowed because no fruitful purpose would be served in continuation of trial. Thus, parties are permitted to compound the offences.

Resultantly, the petition is allowed. Complaint vide Crime No.166/2017 registered at Police Station Ater District Bhind for the offence under Sections 308, 294, 506, 147, 148, 149 of IPC and other consequential proceedings in furtherance thereto, if any, are hereby quashed.

Petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms.

(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE Vishal

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VISHAL UPADHYAY Signing time: 5/15/2023 12:25:50 PM