[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ashish Dwivedi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 January, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:576
1 MCRC-56536-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
ON THE 7 th OF JANUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56536 of 2025
ASHISH DWIVEDI AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Vineet Saxena - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Dinesh Savita - PP for the State.
Shri Divakar Vyas - Advocate for the respondent No.2.
ORDER
The present petition has been preferred by the petitioners under
Section 528 of the BNSS seeking quashment of FIR registered bearing
Crime No.38/2022 at Police Station- Kailaras, District -Morena for the
offence under Sections 420, 406 of the IPC and consequential proceedings
arising thereto on the basis of compromise.
2 . It appears that parties agreed to settle the matter and therefore,
applications vide I.A. No.25884/2025 and I.A. No.25885/2025 have been
preferred at the instance of parties and they want to settle the matter. The
applications are duly signed by respective parties and same are supported by
their affidavits.
3 . The Principal Registrar of this Court has duly verified the parties,
contents of applications, intent and signatures of parties. Report is attached,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:576
2 MCRC-56536-2025
same is perused and it appears that compromise has been reached between
the parties voluntarily without any threat, inducement and coercion.
4 . Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the petitioners and
respondent/complainant have peacefully settled the dispute between them,
therefore, they prayed for quashing of the F.I.R. against them.
5. Counsel for the complainant argued in support of petitioners' prayer
for compromise. He referred the affidavit filed by the
respondents/complainants and they are ready to settle the matter.
6 . Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the
documents appended thereto.
7. 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.
8. 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 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:576
3 MCRC-56536-2025
9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into account
the law laid down by the Apex Court, in the opinion of this Court,
continuance of trial in such matter will be a futile exercise which will serve
no purpose. Under such a situation, Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be justifiably
invoked to prevent abuse of the process of law and wasteful exercise by the
courts below.
1 0 . To preserve the resources and bonhomie created between the
parties arises out of settlement, in the interest of justice, applications for
compounding the offence vide I.A. No.25884/2025 and I.A.
No.25885/2025 are allowed, because no fruitful purpose would be served in
continuation of trial. Thus, parties are permitted to compound the offence.
1 1 . Resultantly, the petition is allowed and FIR bearing Crime
No.38/2022 at Police Station- Kailaras, District -Morena for the offence
under Sections 420, 406 of the IPC and consequential proceedings arising
thereto, if any, are hereby quashed.
12. Accordingly, this petition stands allowed and disposed of in above
terms.
(RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA )
JUDGE
Rashid
