Madhya Pradesh High Court
Digvijay Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 March, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
LOK ADALAT
Cr.R. No.1106 of 2025
(DIGVIJAY SINGH & ORS. VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Dated : 08-03-2025
Shri Brijendra Singh - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Harish Sharma - Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.
Learned counsel for the petitioners/accused informed this Court
that applications under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. (I.A.No.5535 of 2025 and
I.A.No.5536 of 2025) were preferred earlier which are pending before
this Court for settlement of the case. Matter pertains to offence under
Section 324 of IPC and both the parties are of same village, therefore,
they want to settle the matter.
All the accused persons are in jail.
Complainant is present in person before this Court and produced
Adhar Card. He was duly identified by his counsel.
Considering the submission, complainant is directed to appear
before the Principal Registrar of this Court today itself for verification
of factum of compromise.
Matter be placed before this Lok Adalat in post lunch session
once verification report is obtained.
(ANAND PATHAK) (HARISH DIXIT)
Anil* MEMBER MEMBER
Later on (08-03-2025):
1. The present petition is preferred by the petitioners under Section 397
and 401 of Cr.P.C. being crestfallen by the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 05-03-2025 passed by VII Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhind in Cr.A.No.30/2024 confirming the judgment
of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court dated
30-01-2024 whereby petitioners have been convicted and sentenced
as under:
Section Imprisonment Fine
323/34 of 3-3 months' RI Rs.300-300with default
IPC stipulation.
324/34 of 1-1 year's RI Rs.500-500with default
IPC stipulation.
2. It appears that after conviction being recorded by the Courts below,
parties have agreed to settle the matter and they want to settle the
matter once and for all. They filed applications vide I.A.No.5535 of
2025 and I.A.No.5536 of 2025 to settle the matter by way of
compromise. Both the parties have appeared before the Principal
Registrar of this Court today itself to ink-down their identity and
intent. The Principal Registrar of this Court has duly verified the
intent and signatures of parties. The report in this regard is attached.
The same is perused and it appears that compromise has been reached
between the parties voluntarily without any threat, inducement and
coercion.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State has no objection
if both the parties want to settle the dispute by way of compromise.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant Shri Neeraj Dhamaniya also
supported the prayer of petitioners for compromise. He referred the
statement of complainant given before the Principal Registrar of this
Court that he is ready to settle the matter once and for all.
5. 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.
6. 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
noncompoundable 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.
7. Considering the submissions and taking into account the law laid
down by the Apex Court, in the opinion of this Court, keeping the
present revision pending, will be a futile exercise which will serve
no purpose. Therefore, the parties are permitted to settle the matter.
8. Thus, in the interest of justice, applications vide I.A.No.5535 of
2025 and I.A.No.5536 of 2025 are allowed, the prayer made by the
parties is hereby accepted because no fruitful purpose would be
served in keeping the present revision pending. Thus, parties are
permitted to compound the offence by way of compromise.
9. Resultantly, the petition is disposed of in the light of the compromise
arrived at between the parties. The impugned judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 05-03-2025 passed by VII Additional
Sessions Judge, Bhind in Cr.A.No.30/2024 and judgment of
conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court dated 30-
01-2024 in Criminal Case No.1762/2019 are hereby set aside on the
basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. Petitioners are in
jail, they be released forthwith, if not required in other case.
10. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for
compliance.
11. Certified copy as per rules.
(ANAND PATHAK) (HARISH DIXIT)
Anil* MEMBER MEMBER
ANIL KUMAR
CHAURASIYA
2025.03.12
14:42:37
+05'30'
