Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sandeep Singh Parihar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 August, 2022
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
ON THE 02nd OF AUGUST, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE NO. 35687 OF 2022
Between:-
1. SANDEEP SINGH PARIHAR S/O. SHRI
VIJAY SINGH PARIHAR, AGED 29 YEARS,
OCCUPATION PRIVATE JOB
2. VIJAY KUMAR SINGH PARIHAR S/O.
LATE SHRI VISHRAM SINGH PARIHAR,
AGED 68 YEARS, OCCUPATION - RETD.
3. SMT. SHAKUNTALA PARIHAR W/O SHRI
VIJAY SINGH PARIHAR, AGED 63 YEARS,
OCCUPATION - HOUSE WIFE,
ALL R/O DEEPKUNJ, GALI NO.2 NEAR
R.K.PUBLIC SCHOOL, GAYATRI VIHAR
COLONY, PINTOO PARK, MOHANPUR
(MORAR), GWALIOR
........PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI MANAS DUBEY - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
THROUGH POLICE STATION MAHILA
THANA, GWALIOR, DISTRICT
GWALIOR(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SMT. PRIYA PARIHAR @ PRIYA
BHADAURIA W/O SHRI SANDEEP SINGH
PARIHAR, D/O. PRADEEP KUMAR SINGH
AGED 28 YEARS
CURRENT R/O.- H.N. 118, BEHIND
AIRTEL TOWER, GAYATRI VIHAR,
PINTOO PARK, GWALIOR
PERMANENT R/O - C/O PRADEEP
2
KUMAR SINGH, NOVUS FLORENCE
VILLAGE, FLAT NO. E-111, PHASE-II, 135
FEET GANGAVARAM PORT ROAD,
PEDAGANTYADA, VISAKHAPATNAM,
ANDHRA PRADESH 530044
........RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI RAJIV UPADHAYAY - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR
RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE)
(BY SHRI ANAND PUROHIT - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT
NO.2/COMPLAINANT)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This application coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed
the following:
ORDER
The present petition has been preferred by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashment of FIR registered at Crime No.124/2021 at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gwalior for the offence under Sections 498-A, 506, 34 of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and criminal proceedings (arising due to the above mentioned F.I.R.) pending in Case No.3850/2021 RCT before learned J.M.F.C. Court, Gwalior on the basis of compromise.
It is the submission of counsel for the parties that both the parties want to settle the matter and they want to bury the dispute once and for all. They intend to enter into the compromise therefore, application under Section 320 (2) of Cr.P.C. by way of I.A. No.11393/2022 has been 3 preferred by the parties. Parties fairly submit that they want to give peace a chance and for that they want to settle their dispute inter se. Under the direction of this Court, the factum of compromise entered into between the parties has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court and according to the said report, parties settled the matter and intended to compromise the matter.
Parties intended to serve the society in meaningful manner to purge their guilt and to reform themselves from their inner soul, therefore, expressed their desire to perform community service by way of deposit to serve National/Social cause.
A Lean Compromise is better than a Fat Law Suit, instant efforts of the parties indicate the same. It is expected that their bona fide gestures would continue.
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.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into 4 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.
Further the ingredients are mainly under Section 4 of Dowry prohibition Act, therefore, permission to compound the offence is accorded. 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.
To preserve the resources and bonhomie created between the parties arises out of settlement, in the interest of justice, application for compounding the offence vide I.A.No.11393/2022 is allowed because no fruitful purpose would be served in continuation of trial. Thus, parties are permitted to compound the offence.
Resultantly, the petition is allowed. FIR registered at Crime No.124/2021 at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gwalior for the offence under Sections 498-A, 506, 34 of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and criminal proceedings pending before learned J.M.F.C. Court, Gwalior (3850/2021 RCT) stand quashed against the petitioners.
As per the expression and interest, petitioners are directed to deposit Rs.10000/- in favour of Juvenile Justice Fund having Saving Bank A/C No.60411029562 of Bank of Maharashtra, Branch Govindpura Bhopal, IFSC Code MAHB0001988 (a statutory fund created for the welfare of juveniles) within 10 days from today.
Petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms subject to aforesaid conditions.
5Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance.
One copy be sent to Secretary, Juvenile Justice Committee of M.P. High Court at Jabalpur for information.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE AK/-
ANAND KUMAR 2022.08.04 10:06:16 +05'30'