Vijaypal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 6526 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Vijaypal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 March, 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 4 th OF MARCH, 2024
                    MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 7159 of 2024

BETWEEN:-
VIJAYPAL S/O SHRI ATIBAL SINGH, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST GRAM RAIPURA PORSA RAIPUR
DISTRICT MORENA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                       .....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI LOKENDRA SINGH TOMAR - ADVOCATE)

AND
1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE POLICE
      STATION THROUGH POLICE STATION PORSA DISTRICT
      MORENA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    BHUPENDRA SINGH BHADORIYA S/O SHRI SHANKAR
      SINGH BHADORIYA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O GRAM
      RAIPURA, PORSA, MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                   .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI KAUSHLENDRA SINGH TOMAR - PP FOR RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE)
SHRI ADITYA SHARMA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2.

      T h is application coming on for admission this day, t h e cou rt passed the

following:
                                       ORDER

With consent heard finally.

1 . The present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashment of FIR registered at Police Station Porsa, District Morena vide Crime No.146/2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 34, 324 of the IPC as well as entire criminal proceedings arising therefrom viz.RCT No.769/2023 pending before the trial Court.

2. It appears that parties agreed to settle the matter and therefore, application vide I.A.No.3913/2024 has 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. The 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 the 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. He referred affidavit filed by the complainant and 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. 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.

8. 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.

09. 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.

10. Thus, in the interest of justice, application for compounding the offence vide I.A.No.3913/2024 is allowed because no fruitful purpose would be served in continuation of trial. Thus, parties are permitted to compound the offences.

11. Resultantly, the petition is allowed. FIR registered at Crime No.146/2023 at Police Station Porsa, District Morena for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 34, 324 of the IPC as well as entire criminal proceedings arising therefrom viz.RCT No.769/2023 are hereby quashed against the petitioner.

12. Petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms.

13. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.

14. Certified copy as per rules.

(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE Van

VANDANA VERMA 2024.03.04 17:51:42 +05'30'