Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sachin Dagore vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 May, 2025
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10457
1 CRA-9818-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE LOK ADALAT
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
&
SOCIAL WORKER DR. S. K. MATHUR
ON THE 10th OF MAY, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 9818 of 2023
SACHIN DAGORE
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Appellant - Sachin Dagore is present in person.
None for the respondent/State.
Complainant - Mohit Narware is also present in person.
ORDER
Later on (10-05-2025):
1. The present criminal appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. is
preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 19-07-2023 passed by the Sessions Judge, Gwalior
in S.T.No.552/2022 whereby appellant has been convicted under Section 326
of IPC and sentenced to undergo 3 years' RI with fine of Rs.3,000/- with
default stipulation.
2. During pendency of the present appeal, appellant and complainant
both entered into compromise and settled the matter once and for all. In order
to compromise the matter, they preferred I.A.No.10365/2025 and
I.A.No.10366/2025 under Section 359 of BNSS seeking permission to
compound the offence and enter into compromise. In order to bolster his
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10457
2 CRA-9818-2023
submission, reliance has been placed over the decision of Apex Court in the
case of Ramgopal & Anr. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC
Online SC 834.
3. Under the direction of this Court, the factum of compromise
between the parties has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court
today itself and according to the said report, parties settled the matter and
intended to compromise the matter.
4. Appellant/accused and complainant are relatives. Appellant Sachin
Dagore is nephew of complainant. The incident took place in a spur of
moment, in which complainant received injury in his ring finger as the
appellant had bitten him. On the complaint, case was registered against the
appellant and thereafter appellant was convicted and sentenced by the trial
Court as referred above. Thereafter, good sense prevailed between the parties
and they settled the matter once and for all and intended to live peacefully.
Therefore, preferred applications seeking compromise in the matter at
appellate stage.
5. The Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal & Anr. Vs. The State of
Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 834 culled out the four principles
permitting the parties to enter into compromise at appellate stage. Relevant
discussion of the Apex Court reads as under:
"19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed
to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is
squarely guided by the compromise between the
parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the
statutory framework, the extra-ordinary power enjoined
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10457
3 CRA-9818-2023
upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested
in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can
be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section
320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers
of wide amplitude ought to be exercised
carefully in the context of quashing criminal
proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of
the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii)
Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary
nature of compromise between the accused and the
victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to
and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or
other relevant considerations."
6. The Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal & Anr. (supra) laid
down the principles for compromise after conviction recorded against the
accused person. The present case falls within the four tests prescribed by the
Apex Court for permitting the parties to compound the offence. Thus, testing
the case in hand on the parameters of (i) nature and effect of the offence on
the conscious of the society (ii) seriousness of the injury (iii) voluntary
nature of compromise between the accused and the victim and (iv)
conduct of the accused persons prior to and after the occurrence of the
purported offence, this Court is of the considered view that since parties are
in close relation and want to live peacefully by settling the matter once and
for all, therefore, they may be permitted to settle the matter.
7. In view of the above discussion, since parties have settled the matter
once and for all and decided to live peacefully as well as the fact that
appellant has suffered 15 days incarceration, therefore, the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court is modified to the
extent that the judgment of conviction recorded by the trial Court is affirmed
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10457
4 CRA-9818-2023
but the order of sentence is set aside on the basis of compromise reached
between the parties subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- by the appellant to the
complainant. This amount of Rs.5,000/- shall be paid to the complainant
after due verification.
8. The appeal stands disposed of on the basis of compromise in above
terms.
(ANAND PATHAK) (DR. S. K. MATHUR)
MEMBER MEMBER
Anil*
