Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kamta Prasad Katheriya vs Purushottam Verma on 15 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10856
1 MCRC-40375-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
ON THE 15th OF MAY, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 40375 of 2024
KAMTA PRASAD KATHERIYA AND OTHERS
Versus
PURUSHOTTAM VERMA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Yashwantrao Dixit - Advocate with Shri Sidddharth Sharma,
learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri B.P.S.Chauhan - learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Shri Girraj Soni - learned counsel for the respondent/complainant.
ORDER
This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the
order dated 6.4.2024 by which the court below has directed to register the case
under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. and issued summons against
petitioners as well as RCT No.162/2024 on the basis of compromise.
2. The allegation against the petitioners is that they along with accused Virendra
Kumar hatched a conspiracy to sold land of survey No.738 and 739 to the
complainant for consideration of Rs. 4,00,000/- by preparing forged documents.
It is further alleged that petitioners Kamta Preasad and Kallu Batham are the
witnesses of sale deed and they also present at the time of receiving consideration
amount by accused Virendra Kumar.
3. I.A.No.20091 of 2024, application for compromise has been filed by the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10856
2 MCRC-40375-2024
petitioners as well as respondent No.1 duly supported by their affidavits.
4. In compliance of the order passed by this Court, the factum of compromise
has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court, who has recorded
statements of respondent No.1 as well as petitioners and has submitted a report
that the parties have arrived at compromise voluntarily without any threat,
inducement and coercion.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that respondent No.1 has
entered into a compromise with the petitioners and, therefore, the present petition
has been filed for compounding the offence on the basis of compromise.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on
record as well as verification report submitted by Principal Registrar of this
Court.
8 . The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Ramavtar Vs. State of M.P.
reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 966, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, [(2012)
10 SCC 303], and Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr., [(2014) 6
SCC 466, 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, 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.
9. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kapil Gupta Vs. State of NCT of Delhi &
Another passed in Criminal Appeal No.1217 of 2022 decided on 10.8.2022 in
which a criminal case under Section 376 IPC against the petitioner therein was
considered for quashment of FIR on the basis of compromise wherein the Hon'ble
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10856
3 MCRC-40375-2024
Supreme Court while considering the dictum in the case of Narinder Singh
(supra) held in para 13 and 14 that if there is insufficient evidence and by virtue
of compromise there is no chance of conviction and the settlement between the
parties is going to result into harmony between them which may improve their
mutual relationship then at primary stage on such compromise, proceedings may
be quashed. Para 13 and 14 of Kapil Gupta (supra) are material and thus
reproduced for ready reference and convenience:
"13. It can thus be seen that this Court has clearly held that though the
Court should be slow in quashing the proceedings wherein heinous
and serious offences are involved, the High Court is not foreclosed
from examining as to whether there exists material for incorporation of
such an offence or as to whether there is sufficient evidence which if
proved would lead to proving the charge for the offence charged with.
The Court has also to take into consideration as to whether the
settlement between the parties is going to result into harmony between
them which may improve their mutual relationship.
14. The Court has further held that it is also relevant to consider as to
what is stage of the proceedings. It has been observed that if an
application is made at a belated stage wherein the evidence has been
led and the matter is at the stage of arguments or judgment, the Court
should be slow to exercise the power to quash the proceedings.
However, if such an application is made at an initial stage before
commencement of trial, the said factor will weigh with the court in
exercising its power."
10. A three Judges' Bench of Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya
Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan & Ors. reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688 has held as
under:-
"(1) The power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the
criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under
Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and
predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of
commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or
family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute
amongst themselves;
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:10856
4 MCRC-40375-2024
(2) Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions, which
involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences
like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature
and have a serious impact on society;
(3) Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under
the special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the
offences committed by public servants, while working in that capacity
are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the
victim and the offender."
11. Having regard to the aforesaid dictum as well as attending facts and
circumstances of the case, it is found that the crime in question is between the
parties, who now have settled their disputes and resumed their good relations. In
these circumstances, to save valuable time of the Court and in the interest of
justice, it appears to be a fit case to exercise the power under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. because letting the dispute hang on, there are chances that relationship
between the parties may disrupt again, moreover there is remote and bleak
possibility of conviction in this case keeping in view the compromise took place
between the parties. The settlement between the parties is going to result in
harmony between them which may improve their future relationship. It is also
pertinent to mention here that the evidence is yet to be started.
12. Resultantly, this Court allows this petition by quashing order dated 6.4.2024
and criminal case RCT No.162/2024 pending before JMFC Mehgaon, Bhind so
far as it relates to the petitioners.
13. This petition stands disposed of in above terms.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
Ahmad
