Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rohit @ Santram Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 December, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:2012
1 MCRC-24899-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI
ON THE 18th OF DECEMBER, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 24899 of 2025
ROHIT @ SANTRAM SAHU
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Smt. Vipra Kochar - Advocate for applicant.
Shri Swatrant Pandey - Panel Lawyer for the State.
Shri D.K. Shah - Advocate for respondent No.2.
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.) for quashment of FIR registered in Crime No.112/2025 at Police Station Sohagpur District Shahdol (M.P.) for the offences under Section 332, 64, 64 (2) (m), 88, 89, 351 (2) of the BNS 2023 and Sections 5/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act 2012.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 9.9.2024 at about 03:00 pm in the day, the victim was alone in her house, the applicant entered her house and caught hold her and committed rape with her. Due to fear, she did not tell anyone about the incident. Three days later, the applicant again found her alone at home and sexually assaulted her and whenever he saw her alone at home, he used to sexually assault her. An FIR was lodged on 16.03.2025.
3. Feeling aggrieved by lodging of FIR, this petition is filed requesting quashment of FIR and all consequential proceedings thereof on following Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ NAGLE Signing time: 13-01-2026 12:49:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:2012 2 MCRC-24899-2025 grounds :-
i) No offence as alleged is made out.
ii) It is a case of consensual relationship between consenting adults.
iii) The FIR is clearly a misuse of process of law.
iv) The prosecutrix has settled the matter with the accused.
4. During pendency of this petition, application i.e. I.A. No. 29828/2025 was filed u/s 320 of Cr.P.C for compromise along with affidavit of complainant/respondent No.2.
5. This Court vide order dated 17.12.2025 had directed the parties to appear before the Registrar (J-II) of this Court for recording their statements and for verification of factum of compromise. The Registrar (J-II) has submitted his report on 17.12.2025 and verified the factum of compromise.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.2 contend that since the parties have amicably settled their dispute, therefore continuation of proceedings relating to alleged FIR would be useless and abuse of process of law. The complainant does not wish to pursue the prosecution against the applicant/accused. They wish to accord a quietus to all the disputes between the families and proceed with the life.
7. Per-contra, learned counsel for the State opposed this petition and referring the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under section 164 of Cr.P.C/183 of BNS submits that in view of direct allegations, the FIR should not be quashed.
8. Heard both the parties and perused the record.
9. In the cases of Jagdish Channa & Others Vs. State of Haryana & another Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ NAGLE Signing time: 13-01-2026 12:49:00 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:2012 3 MCRC-24899-2025 [AIR 2008 SC 1968], Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab [AIR 2008 SC 1969]; Shiji Vs. Radhika & Another [ (2011) 10 SCC 705,]; Kapil Gupta Vs. State of NCT of Delhi [2022 SCC Online SC 1030]; Ananda D.V. Vs. State and another [2021 SCC Online SC 3423] and Narinder Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has 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.
10. As per prosecution case, date of incident is between 09.09.2024 to 05.11.2024 and FIR is lodged on 16.03.2025 and prosecutrix is a major girl and allegation against the applicant is that both were in physical relationship and due to which the prosecutrix was pregnant later on. Police Station Sohagpur District Shahdol has registered the offences under Sections 332, 64, 64 (2) (m), 88, 89, 351 (2) of the BNS 2023 and Sections 5/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act 2012 at Crime No.112/2025. The prosecutrix is a major girl and compromise has been taken place which is duly verified by the concerned Registrar on 17.12.2025.
11. After hearing rival contentions and taking into account the law laid down by the Apex Court, in the opinion of this Court, continuance of the prosecution in this matter will be a futile exercise which will serve no purpose. In view of amicable settlement, possibility of conviction is bleak.
12. In the obtaining facts and circumstances of the case, Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be justifiably invoked to prevent abuse of the process of law and wasteful exercise by the Courts below.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ NAGLE Signing time: 13-01-2026 12:49:00NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:2012 4 MCRC-24899-2025
13. Consequently, this Court allows IA No.29828/2025 and in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C/528 of B.N.S.S. directs that the FIR dated 16.03.2025 registered at Crime No.112/2025 in Police Station - Sohagpur District Shahdol for the offences punishable under Sections 332, 64, 64 (2) (m), 88, 89, 351 (2) of the BNS 2023 and Sections 5/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act 2012 is hereby quashed with all consequential proceedings thereto.
14. This petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C/528 of B.N.S.S. stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Certified copy as per rules.
(HIMANSHU JOSHI) JUDGE pn Signature Not Verified Signed by: PANKAJ NAGLE Signing time: 13-01-2026 12:49:00