Madhya Pradesh High Court
Heera Lal Yadav @ Maddu Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 August, 2014
M.Cr.C. No.11309/13
04.08.2014
Accused/applicants no.1 to 3 (Heeralal Yadav, Gagan
Yadav and Pawan Yadav) are present in person and identified
by their counsel Shri Uday Kumar.
Shri R.K.Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer for the respondent
no.1/State.
Omkar Singh (complainant before the trial Court)/respondent no.1 who is identified by is counsel Shri Parmananad Sahu is present in person.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
This application is filed by the applicants (accused persons) under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and have prayed for quashment of 0rder dated 12.02.13 passed in unregistered private criminal complaint case pending before JMFC, Jabalpur (Omkar Singh vs. Maddu @ Heeralal Yadav and others) as well as to set aside the order passed on 12.04.13 in Criminal Revision No. 117/13 by learned 4th Addl. Sessions Judge, Jabalpur.
The complainant (respondent no.2) had filed a private complaint against the applicants under Section 200 of Cr.P.C.for registering a case for the offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 and Section 427/34 of the IPC. On 24.06.10, the SHO, Gohalpur was directed by the learned trial Court to register an FIR, investigate the matter and file a report.
Later on the parties agreed to withdraw the case on compromise and complainant had filed an application under Section 257 of the Cr.P.C. to withdraw the unregistered complaint case . The application has been dismissed by learned trial Court saying that withdrawal of the case under Section 257 of Cr.P.C. is applicable only in summons case but present is a case for the offences punishable under Sections 457,380,427/34 of IPC, therefore, under Section 257 of the Cr.P.C.the case cannot be withdrawn. The aforesaid order was challenged by way of filing a revision which was also dismissed, hence this application.
Both parties i.e. respondent no.2/complainant and accused/applicants have filed IA no.15288/14, a joint application for compromise. It is submitted by them, on verification of compromise before Registrar (J-1) today , that they bear cordial relations and are ready and willing to resolve their disputes voluntarily and by free consent. They have also expressed in clear unequivocal terms that there is peace between them and they are now residing amicably and their disputes have been resolved.
It is pertinent to mention here that as per detailed police report (Annexure A/4 at page 22 to 26 of this petition) filed by the SHO, Police Station, Gohalpur, Jabalpur, no case is made out against the applicants.
It has been ruled by the Apex Court in Shiji @ Pappu and others vs. Radhika and Anr. 2012 Cr.L.R.(SC) 69 that where there is no chance of recording conviction against the accused persons and the entire exercise of trial is destined to be exercise of futility, the criminal case registered against the accused persons though it may not be compoundable can be quashed by the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
Since the parties had buried the hatchet by amicably settling their disputes, this Court could allow the matter to be compounded.
Having regard to the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties and in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in Shiji @ Pappu and others vs. Radhika and Anr.(supra), the order dated 24.06.10 passed by trial Court for registering FIR and submit the final report in complaint case, still unregistered, pending before JMFC, Jabalpur Omkar Singh vs. Maddu @ Heeralal Yadav and others as well as impugned order passed on 12.04.13 in Criminal Revision No.117/13 by learned 4th ASJ, Jabalpur and all consequential proceedings are hereby quashed.
The petition is allowed accordingly.
A copy of this order be sent to learned Courts below for information and compliance.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge Jk.