Rohit Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 17788 MP

                                                             1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT GWALIOR
                                                     BEFORE
                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                                              ON THE 26 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
                                         MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 39386 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           ROHIT GURJAR S/O SHRI JASWANT GURJAR, AGED
                           ABOUT   25  YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE JOB
                           TOPEWALA MOHALLA JIWAJI GANJ LASHKAR
                           GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI AYUSH SAXENA - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
                                 POLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE STATION
                                 CYBER CELL DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    SALMA KHATUN D/O SHRI ABDUL KLAM, AGED
                                 ABOUT 26 YEARS, PYAREPUR SALAUDDIN PUR
                                 DHOSI MAU (UTTAR PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                           (SHRI K.S. TOMAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1-
                           STATE AND SHRI ANURAG SINGH RATHORE - ADVOCATE FOR
                           RESPONDENT NO.2)

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

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashing the FIR lodged by complainant- respondent no.2 against the petitioner bearing Crime No.0337/2019 at police station Cyber Cell, District Gwalior for the offence under Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of Information & Technology Act, 2008 and other subsequent proceedings arising of said crime. Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 10/27/2023 11:15:08 AM

During pendency of this petition, the applicant and complainant had entered into the compromise and an application was filed under Section 320 (2) of the Cr.P.C alongwith affidavit which was registered as I.A. No.16206 of 2023 stating therein that they have resolved the dispute amicably and now they do not want to pursue the matter any more.

This Court, vide order dated 08-09-2023, 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 12-10-2023 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, 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.

In recent judgment in the matter of Kapil Gupta Vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. passed in criminal appeal No.1217/2022 on 10.8.2022 , the Hon'ble Apex Court while relying the judgment of Apex Court in the matter of Narender Singh Vs. State of Punjab, which reads as under:

"29.5 While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 10/27/2023 11:15:08 AM

29.6 Offences under Section 307 IPC would fall in the category of heinous and serious 1 (2014) 6 SCC 466 offences and therefore are to be generally treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to proving the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. Medical report in respect of injuries suffered by the victim can generally be the guiding factor. On the basis of this prima facie analysis, the High Court can examine as to whether there is a strong possibility of conviction or the chances of conviction are remote and bleak. In the former case it can refuse to accept the settlement and quash the criminal proceedings whereas in the latter case it would be permissible for the High Court to accept the plea compounding the offence based on complete settlement between the parties. At this stage, the Court can also be swayed by the fact that the settlement between the parties is going to result in harmony between them which may improve their future relationship. 29.7 While deciding whether to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Code or not, timings of settlement play a crucial role. Those cases where the settlement is arrived at immediately after the alleged commission of offence and the matter is still under investigation, the High Court may be liberal in accepting the settlement to quash the criminal proceedings/investigation. It is because of the reason that at this stage the investigation is still on and even the chargesheet has not been filed. Likewise, those cases where the charge is framed but the evidence is yet to start or the evidence is still at infancy stage, the High Court can show benevolence in exercising its powers favourably, but after prima facie assessment of the circumstances/material mentioned above. On the other hand, where the prosecution evidence is almost complete or after the conclusion of the evidence the matter is at the stage of argument, normally the High Court should refrain from exercising its power under Section 482 o f the Code, as in such cases the trial court would be in a position to decide the case finally on merits and to come a conclusion as to whether the offence under Section 307 IPC is committed or not. Similarly, in those cases where the conviction is already recorded by the trial court and the matter is at the appellate stage before the High Court, mere compromise between the parties would not be a ground to accept the same resulting in acquittal of the offender Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 10/27/2023 11:15:08 AM

who has already been convicted by the trial court. Here charge is proved under Section 307 I P C and conviction is already recorded of a heinous crime and, therefore, there is no question of sparing a convict found guilty of such a crime."

has held in para 13, 14, 15,16 and 17 which reads as under:-

13. It can thus be seen that this Court has clearly held that though the Court should be slow in quashing the proceedings wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, the High Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving the charge for the offence charged with. The Court has also to take into consideration as to whether the settlement between the parties is going to result into harmony between them which may improve their mutual relationship.

14. The Court has further held that it is also relevant to consider as to what is stage of the proceedings. It has been observed that if an application is made at a belated stage wherein the evidence has been led and the matter is at the stage of arguments or judgment, the Court should be slow to exercise the power to quash the proceedings. However, if such an application is made at an initial stage before commencement of trial, the said factor will weigh with the court in exercising its power.

15. The facts and circumstances as stated hereinabove are peculiar in the present case. Respondent No.2 is a young lady of 23 years. She feels that going through trial in one case, where she is a complainant and in the other case, wherein she is the accused would rob the prime of her youth. She feels that if she is made to face the trial rather than getting any relief, she would be faced with agony of undergoing the trial.

16. In both the cases, though the charge sheets have been filed, the charges are yet to be framed and as such, the trial has not yet commenced. It is further to be noted that since the respondent No.2 herself is not supporting the prosecution case, even if the criminal trial is permitted to go ahead, it will end in nothing else than an acquittal. If the request of the parties is denied, it will be amounting to only adding one more criminal case to the already overburdened criminal courts.

17. In that view of the matter, we find that though in a heinous or serious crime like rape, the Court should not normally exercise the powers of quashing the proceedings, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and in order to give succour to Respondent No. 2 so that she is saved from further agony of facing two criminal trials, one as a victim and one as an accused, we find that this is a fit case wherein the extraordinary powers of this Court be exercised to quash the criminal proceedings.

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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 10/27/2023 11:15:08 AM

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. Moreso, the offence in question is not against the society but merely affects the victim. Consequent upon the above said facts and that applicants and complainant have amicably resolved the issue and they are permitted to compound the offences, this Court allows this MCRC with the following directions :-

FIR lodged by complainant- respondent no.2 against the petitioner bearing Crime No.0337/2019 at police station Cyber Cell, District Gwalior for the offence under Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of Information & Technology Act, 2008 IPC and other subsequent proceedings arising of said crime are hereby quashed.

Accordingly, petition stands allowed.

A copy of this order be sent to concerned police station for information. CC as per rules.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE neetu

Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEETU SHASHANK Signing time: 10/27/2023 11:15:08 AM