Madhya Pradesh High Court
Neeraj Baghel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 February, 2024
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 2 nd OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2148 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
1. NEERAJ BAGHEL S/O SHRI NATHURAM BAGHEL,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O GRAM
SUNDARPURA THANA LAHAR DISTRICT BHIND
MP (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. HIMMAT BAGHEL S/O NATHURAM BAGHEL,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNDARPURA
THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. NATHURAM BAGHEL S/O FUSU BAGHEL, AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNDARPURA
THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. DINESH BAGHEL S/O FUSU BAGHEL, AGED ABOUT
34 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNDARPURA THANA
LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. MANOJ BAGHEL S/O MANNULAL BAGHEL, AGED
ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNDARPURA
THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. RAJESH BAGHEL S/O MANNULAL BAGHEL, AGED
ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNDARPURA
THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI PRADEEP KATARE- ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE THANA LAHAR DISTRICT BHIND MP
(MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VISHAL
UPADHYAY
Signing time: 03-02-2024
11:26:05 AM
2
2. VISHAMBHAR DAYAL S/O MAHADEV
CHOURASIYA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O GRAM
SUNDARPURA THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. AMREESH S/O VISHAMBHAR DAYAL
CHOURASIYA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O GRAM
SUNDARPURA THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. VIMLESH KUMAR S/O VISHAMBHAR DAYAL,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNDARPURA
THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. RAJESH KUMAR S/O VISHAMBHAR DAYAL, AGED
ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNDARPURA
THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. AKHILESH S/O VISHAMBHAR DAYAL
CHOURASIYA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O GRAM
SUNDARPURA THANA LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND
(MADHYA PRADESH)
7. MITHLESH KUMAR S/O SHRI
VISHAMBHARDAYAL CHOURASIYA, AGED ABOUT
40 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNDARPURA THANA
LAHAR, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI RAJEEV UPADHYAY- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR
RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE)
(SHRI ASHIRVAD DWIVEDI- ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
With consent heard finally.
1. The present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by
the petitioners seeking quashment of FIR registered at Police Station Lahar,
District Bhind vide Crime No.130/2020 for the offence punishable under
Sections 323, 324, 294, 506, 34 and 325 of IPC as well as entire proceedings
arising out of it.
2 . It appears that parties agreed to settle the matter and therefore,
applications vide I.A.No.960/2024 and I.A. No.961/2024 have been preferred
at the instance of parties and they want to settle the matter. Application is duly
signed by respective parties and same is supported by their affidavits.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that initially case
was registered under Sections 323, 324, 294, 506, 34 and 325 of IPC. Later on,
through medical report, it was found that one of the fingers of the victim was
fractured due to lathi blow by one of the accused persons, therefore, offence
under Section 325 was added at time of filing of charge-sheet.
4 . T he 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.
5 . Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1/State opposed the
prayer and prayed for rejection of the petition.
6. Learned 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 once and for all.
7 . Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the
documents appended thereto.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.960/2024 and I.A. No.961/2024 are allowed because
no fruitful purpose would be served in continuation of trial. Thus, parties are
permitted to compound the offences.
12. At this juncture, learned counsel for the parties submit that parties
have regret for the proceedings undertaken involving the state machinery
(Police, Prosecution and the Court) and for that they intend to do some
national/social service by way of depositing Rs.2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand
Only), Rs.1000/- each, in favour of Juvenile Justice Fund having Saving
Bank Account No.60411029562 of Bank of Maharashtra, Branch
Govindpura, Bhopal, IFSC Code MAHB0001988 (a statutory fund
created for the welfare of juveniles).
13. Resultantly, the petition is allowed. FIR registered at Crime
No.130/2020 at Police Station Lahar, District Bhind for the offence punishable
under Sections 323, 324, 294, 506, 34 and 325 of IPC as well as entire
proceedings in furtherance thereto, if any, are hereby quashed as per the
compromise arrived between the parties.
14. Petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms.
15. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
16. Certified copy as per rules.
(ANAND PATHAK)
JUDGE
Vishal
