Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ankit Bhattad vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 November, 2022

Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh

Bench: Satyendra Kumar Singh

                                 1
                                                 M.Cr.C. No.2094/2022

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           AT INDORE
                            BEFORE
    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH

               ON THE 7th OF NOVEMBER, 2022

            MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 2094 of 2022

 BETWEEN:-
1. ANKIT BHATTAD S/O ANIL BHATTAD
   AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE
2. ANIL BHATTAD S/O SHRI NANDLALJI BHATTAD
   AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS
3. SMT. KANTA BHATTAD W/O SHRI ANIL BHATTAD
   AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE
4. PALLAVI BHATTAD D/O SHRI ANIL BHATTAD
   AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT

 ALL R/O AASTHA ABOVE MANAV MOTORS GEETA NAGAR
 AKOLA (MAHARASHTRA)
                                      .....APPLICANTS
 (BY SHRI PRATEEK MAHESHWARI, ADVOCATE)
 AND
   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
   STATION HOUSE OFFICER
1.
   THROUGH POLICE STATION NAGDA
   UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
   SMT. PALAK BHATTAD W/O SHRI ANKIT BHATTAD
   D/O SHRI JHAMAK RATHI, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
2.
   R/O 7 MG ROAD NAGDA JUNCTION
   UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                       .....NON-APPLICANTS
   (BY SHRI R. S. BAIS, G.A. FOR NO.1)
   (BY SHRI VIJAY SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR NO.2)

    This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
                                        2
                                                         M.Cr.C. No.2094/2022

Satyendra Kumar Singh passed the following:

                                  ORDER

Heard.

This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashment of FIR registered vide Crime No.555/2021 dated 22.06.2021 at Police Station Nagda, District Ujjain for the offence punishable under Section 498-A and 34 of IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and other subsequent criminal proceedings pending against the applicants before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ujjain.

2. Factual matrix giving rise to the instant case for just and proper adjudication of this petition are that applicant No.1 got married to non- applicant No.2 on 04.02.2018 as per Hindu Rights and Rituals at Akola (Maharashtra). Applicant Nos.2, 3 & 4 are father, mother and sister respectively of applicant No.1. After marriage, difference of opinion crept in between the parties which kept on increasing day by day leading into filing of complaint by non-applicant No.2 at police station Nagda, District Ujjain on 22.06.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 34 of IPC alongwith 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the applicants. After filing of the charge-sheet, criminal case was registered against the applicants at the aforesaid police station, wherein after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ujjain. During the pendency of the case, applicants moved an application for anticipatory bail before the Trial Court, which was allowed vide order dated 27.08.2021 in respect of applicant Nos.2 to 4 but rejected the anticipatory bail on behalf of applicant No.1. In pursuance of the said dismissal order, applicant No.1 stands protected by orders of the Apex Court for stay of arrest vide order dated 30.09.2021. Applicants and non-applicant No.2 have entered into compromise as disputes and differences between them stands 3 M.Cr.C. No.2094/2022 settled amicably. Hence, the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants alongwith compromise application vide I.A. No.8448/2022 and IA No.8447/2022.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed on the following judgements in support of his contentions :-

a) Vikrant Chopra and others vs. State and another, 2019 SCC Online Del 9321
b) Yash Jain and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, 2022 SCC Online MP 601
c) Arshad Ahmad and others vs. State NCT of Delhi and another, 2022 SCC Online Del 1736
d) Unique Surana vs. The Stateof Madhya Pradesh, MCRC No.14451/2018 dated 23.04.2018.

4. On 24.06.2022, this Court had directed both the parties to appear in person before the Principal Registrar for verification of factum of compromise. In compliance of the Court orders, parties have appeared before the Principal Registrar on 07.07.2022. Verification report in that behalf is on record.

5. Although, the charges alleged against the applicants are non- compoundable offences, but Hon'ble the Apex Court in the matters of B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana [2003 (4) SCC 675], Geeta Mehrotra and another Vs. State of U.P. [2012(10) SCC 741] and Jitendra Raghuvanshi and others Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi and others[2013(4) SCC 58] has compounded the offences under Section 498-A of the IPC with other incidental offences holding that compounding of the offences would lead to amicable settlement of matrimonial disputes between the parties.

6 Further, in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012(10) 4 M.Cr.C. No.2094/2022 SCC 303], the Apex Court has laid down broad guidelines for quashment of the FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in para 61 of the decision.

7. In view of the above mentioned decisions (supra), the compromise arrived at between the applicants and non-applicant No.2 deserves to be accepted. Therefore, this Court accepts the application for compromise invoking its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Consequently, this petition is allowed. The FIR bearing Crime No.555/2021 dated 22.06.2021 registered against the applicants at Police Station Nagda, District Ujjain and the subsequent criminal proceedings based thereupon stand quashed. Applicants are discharged from the charges under Sections 498-A and 34 of IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

8. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court for information and necessary compliance/action without delay.

9. Accordingly, the petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. stands disposed of as indicated above.

Certified copy as per rules (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE gp GEETA Digitally signed by GEETA PRAMOD DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=1dc3d93a178bbacd0e9485f9f6e99335499bddb32501 850a4984b5b63f6d7a38, PRAMOD pseudonym=12F09B7BC77D4D3D96B764E8FA34B6FE3874D43 4, serialNumber=41554F8E701AEEB833278B4FDD900CBED72CCF 299EA61E33BBE6175289BA0390, cn=GEETA PRAMOD Date: 2022.11.09 15:44:21 +05'30'