Madhya Pradesh High Court
Navendra @ Naveen Rajak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 March, 2025
Author: Hirdesh
Bench: Hirdesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6810
1 MCRC-6427-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 22 nd OF MARCH, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6427 of 2025
NAVENDRA @ NAVEEN RAJAK
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Ravindra Singh Rajpoot - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Dinesh Savita - Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1/State.
Shri Mayaram Lodhi, learned counsel for the respondent No.2/complainant.
ORDER
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
This petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 (under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.) for quashment of the criminal proceedings vide
FIR/Crime No.510/2023 registered at Police Station - Janakganj, District Gwalior
for offence punishable under Sections 363 of IPC and thereafter, enhanced
Sections 366-A, 376(2)(n) of IPC & Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act and subsequent
criminal proceeding of case No. 278/2023 ST pending before the learned Special
Judge, (POCSO) Act, Gwalior.
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
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6810
2 MCRC-6427-2025
compromise willingly.
3. Counsel for the State submits that the offences under Section 363, 366-A
and 376(2)(N) of IPC and Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act 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.510/2023 registered at Police
Station- Janakganj, District Gwalior.
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:6810
3 MCRC-6427-2025
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 living peacefully
together. 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.510/2023 registered at Police Station
- Janakganj, District Gwalior for offence punishable under Sections 363 of IPC
and thereafter, enhanced Sections 366-A, 376(2)(n) of IPC & Section 5(L)/6 of
POCSO Act and subsequent criminal proceeding of case No. 278/2023 ST
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:6810
4 MCRC-6427-2025
pending before the learned Special Judge, (POCSO) Act, Gwalior 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*
