Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pradeep Kushwah vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 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 13 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 3354 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
PRADEEP KUSHWAH S/O SHRI CHHOTELAL KUSHWAH,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION-BUSINESS, R/O
NEW COLONY GHOSIPURA THANA MURAR DISTRICT
GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI PRADEEP KATARE AND SHRI M.L.YADAV - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE THANA ATER DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ABHIYOKTI THROUGH P.S. ATER BHIND
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI M.S.JADON - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
(BY SHRI ASHIRWAD DWIVEDI - ADVOCATE)
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
t h e petitioner seeking quashment of FIR registered at Police Station Ater,
District Bhind vide Crime No.113/2022 for the offence punishable under
Section 376 of IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act as well as entire criminal
proceedings arising therefrom.
2 . It appears that parties agreed to settle the matter and therefore,
applications vide I.A.No.1532/2024 and I.A. No.1533/2024 h a v e been
preferred at the instance of parties and they want to settle the matter.
Applications are duly supported by their affidavits.
3 . 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.
4 . Learned counsel for respondent No.1/State opposed the prayer and
prayed for rejection of the petition.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant argued in support of petitioners'
prayer for compromise and referred affidavit filed by the complainant stating
that he is ready to settle the matter once and for all.
6 . Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the
documents appended thereto.
7. In the present case petitioner and respondent have entered into the
wedlock and both are living as married couple. Beside that prosecutrix is on her
family way and likely to deliver a baby in coming months. Therefore, they are
now in settled marital house hold. Prosecutrix is living in her matrimonial house
hold alongwith her in-laws and any deviation or discordant effect would have
direct bearing over the marital live of couple and overall well being of
prosecutrix. She intends to remain in matrimonial house hold.
8. Petitioner and prosecutrix reamin present on last date of hearing i.e.
05.02.2024 and both expressed their desire to live happily as couple.Statements
recorded under Sections 161 and 164 of CPC indicate consensual relationship
and it appears that prosecutrix left her maternal home on her own volition and
lived with petitioner consensually. In such situation, it would be too harsh to
disturb the family fold of petitioner and prosecutrix.
9. 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.
1 0 . 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.
11. 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.
1 2 . Thus, in the interest of justice, application for compounding the
offence vide I.A.No.1532/2024 and I.A. No.1533/2024 are allowed because no
fruitful purpose would be served in continuation of trial. Thus, parties are
permitted to compound the offences.
13. Resultantly, the petition is allowed. FIR registered at Police Station
Ater, District Bhind vide Crime No.113/2022 for the offence punishable under
Section 376 of IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act as well as entire criminal
proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
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
Ashish*
