Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rahul Narwariya @ Parewa vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 March, 2025
Author: Hirdesh
Bench: Hirdesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6788
1 MCRC-6109-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 22nd OF MARCH, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6109 of 2025
RAHUL NARWARIYA @ PAREWA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Vishal Singh Bhadoriya - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Dinesh Savita - Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
Shri Trishant Mishra - Advocate for respondent No.2.
ORDER
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for
quashment of the criminal proceedings v i d e FIR/Crime No.417/2019
registered at Police Station - Bhind Dehat, District Bhind for offence
punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC & Section 3/4 of POCSO
Act as well as consequential proceedings thereto.
2. The parties filed an application for compromise. The said
application was sent for verification before the Principal Registrar of this
Court. The accused and the complainant along with their counsel appeared
before the Registrar. On verification, he submitted that the compromise has
been arrived between the parties without any pressure, duress or coercion
and the parties have entered into compromise willingly.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6788
2 MCRC-6109-2025
3. Counsel for the State submits that the offences under Section 363,
366 and 376 of IPC are non-compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.P.C.
4. The attention of this Court has been drawn to the decision rendered
by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.394-395 of 2021 passed in
the case of Ananda D.V. v. State & another on 12.04.2021 wherein, in
similar circumstances, the order of the High Court rejecting the petition for
quashment of the FIR was set aside, and the FIR was quashed; and which
judgment has also been relied upon by this Court in Miscellaneous Criminal
Case No.43974/2021 (Shubham @ Lala s/o Shri Gopichand Thakur v. The
State of Madhya Pradesh and another) order dated 29.09.2021. Thus, it is
submitted that the FIR in the present case be also quashed as also the further
proceedings of the Crime No.417/2019 registered at Police Station- Bhind
Dehat, District - Bhind.
5. The order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Ananda D.V.
v. State & another (supra) reads, as under:
"These appeals take exception to the judgment and order dated 14.11.2019 and
30.01.2020 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition
Criminal Nos. 2382 of 2019 and 287 of 2020 respectively, whereby the High
Court rejected the criminal writ petitions for quashing of FIR No. 455 of 2013
dated 17.09.2013 in respect of offence registered at P.S. Safdarjung Enclave,
Delhi and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.
The gravamen of the allegations in the FIR filed by the private respondent was
that the appellant had promised her that he will marry her, which promise was
not kept by the appellant. The FIR was registered on 17.09.2013.
It is not in dispute that after the registration of FIR, the parties were able to
resolve their differences and eventually got married on 11.10.2014. The
appellant as well as private respondent represented by Ms. Meenakshi Arora,
learned senior counsel jointly state that they are enjoying happy married life.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6788
3 MCRC-6109-2025
A joint request is, therefore, made on behalf of the appellant and the private
respondent that the FIR registered on 17.09.2013 be quashed as it was the
outcome of some misunderstanding between the parties.
Considering the nature of allegations in the FIR and the realization of the fact
that due to miscommunication FIR came to be registered at the relevant point
of time which issues/ misunderstanding have now been fully resolved and the
parties are happily married since 11.10.2014, the basis of FIR does not survive.
Rather registering such FIR was an ill-advised move on the part of the private
respondent, is the stand now taken before us. It is seen that the appellant and
private respondent are literate and well-informed persons and have jointly
opted for quashing of the stated FIR.
Taking overall view of the matter, therefore, in the interest of justice, we
accede to the joint request of quashing of FIR in the peculiar facts of the
present case. Hence, these appeals must succeed. The impugned judgment and
order is set aside. Instead, the Writ Petition filed by the appellant for quashing
is allowed, as a result of which, all steps taken on the basis of impugned FIR
be treated as effaced from the record in law.
The appeals are disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any,
stand dispose of."
6. That the same view has been taken by a co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in order dated 09.03.2022 passed in M.Cr.C No.11171/2022 (Chandan
Singh S/o Devisingh Vs. State of M.P. and another).
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and on
the anvil of the aforesaid decision rendered by the Supreme Court and further
the fact that the applicant and the prosecutrix have married and are now
blessed with a child. The matter has been amicably settled between the
parties, I find that the application needs to be allowed.
8. Resultantly, the present M.Cr.C. stands allowed; and FIR registered
against the applicant in relation to Crime No.417/2019 registered at Bhind
Dehat, District Bhind for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of
IPC & Section 3/4 of POCSO Act as well as consequential proceedings
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6788
4 MCRC-6109-2025
thereto are hereby quashed and the action taken against the applicant
pursuant to the lodging of FIR be treated as effaced from record in law.
Certified copy, as per rules.
(HIRDESH)
JUDGE
*VJ*
