Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arpit Hora Alias Haritpal Singh Hora vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 July, 2023
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 25th OF JULY, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 51287 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
ARPIT HORA ALIAS HARITPAL SINGH HORA S/O
SHRI SURENDRA SINGH HORA, AGED ABOUT 42
YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONTRACTOR 191,
1.
TRANSPORT NAGAR, KHATIWALA TANK,
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
NEERAJ PANJWANI ALIAS NEELU PANJWANI
S/O SHRI SHRICHAND PANJWANI, AGED ABOUT
2. 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS ADD.- 115,
JANKI NAGAR EXTENSION, INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI VISHAL BAHETI ALONG WITH
SHRI ARPIT KUMAR OSWAL- ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH SHO POLICE
1.
STATION LASUDIYA INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
RAM SINGH S/O SHRI HARGOVINDAR SINGH
ALIAS ARVIND SINGH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: CHUKIDARI PRESENT
2. RESIDENT 6, MAYAKHEDI , NEAR OMAX CITY
PHASE -1 , INDORE AND PERAMENT ADD
RESIDENT GRAM GUNERA, TEH. BAGLI, DIST.
DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. VARSHA SINGH THAKUR GA )
RESPONDENT NO.2 BY SHRI AJAY JAIN- ADVOCATE)
_____________________________________________________________________
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed
the following:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMOL
NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG
Signing time: 26-07-2023
14:35:50
2
ORDER
The petitioners have preferred this petition filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C for quashment of FIR no. 1456/2022 registered at police station - Lasudia, Indore for the offence punishable under sections 420, 374, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "IPC") and sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(h), 3(2)\(i) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) 1989 (in short "SC & ST Act") and all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR.
2/ Brief facts of the case are that Ramsingh/respondent no. 2 made written complaint alleging that in the year 2017. Arpit Arora/petitioner no. 1 appointed respondent no. 2 as Chaukidar for Survey No. 184, 186, 187, 188/1 of Gram Mayakhedi on a fixed salary of Rs. 8000/- per month. Applicant no. 1 represented before him that, at the instruction of the applicant no. 2, respondent no. 2 was appointed as Chaukidar. Upon the aforesaid instruction of the applicant no. 1, the complainant along with his wife and three daughters, started living there at Gram Mayakhedi by building a temporary "Tapri" and was looking after the land. Initially the petitioners have paid 2-3 months salary to the complainant, but immediately after the death of Shri Kedar Maharaj, no salary has been paid to the complainant. The petitioner had promised to pay the salary to the complainant but no amount was paid and the complainant is surviving only on the earnings on his wife which she is getting by washing the vessels in various houses. Rs. 4,96,000/- is the amount required to be paid in the past five years but only an amount of Rs. 19,000/- has been paid and even after deduction of the aforesaid amount, salary of Rs. 4,77,000/- is still due. On 16.09.2022 at 5:00 pm both the petitioenrs came to the agricultural land and when the complainant demanded his due salary, then both the petitioners refused Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMOL NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG Signing time: 26-07-2023 14:35:50 3 to pay any amount and started to speak abusive words relating to casts and also threatened him for life. The complainant belongs to tribal community, who has been compelled to do begar in past four years. Accordingly, the aforementioned offence was registered against the petitioners.
3/ Both the petitioners have preferred this petition before this Court by stating that the matter has been amicably settled between both the parties and no dispute remained between them. No offence is made out against the petitioners. There is no legal evidence to connect the petitioners with the aforementioned offence. Hence, learned counsel prays for quashment of FIR no. 1456/2022 registered at police station - Lasudia, Indore for the offence punishable under sections 420, 374, 506, 34 of IPC and sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(h), 3(2)\(i) of SC & ST Act and all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR.
4/ During pendency of the petition, both the parties filed joint compromise petition/application i.e. I.A. no. 14210/2022 and as per the order dated 02/11/2022 passed by this Court, both the parties appeared before the Principal Registrar of this Court for verification of factum of compromise arrived at between the parties. Factum of compromise has duly been verified by the Principal Registrar on 07/11/2022 and according to which, the matter has been amicably settled between both the parties. They have entered into compromise out of their sweet will. There is no undue influence, pressure, force, duress or coercion over the complainant, who entered into amicable settlement. Both the parties amicably settled their dispute. Although the offence under sections 420 and 506 of IPC is compoundable offences, but offences under section 374 of IPC and sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(h), 3(2)\(i) of SC & ST Act are non-compoundable in nature. Hence he prays that the petitioner be Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMOL NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG Signing time: 26-07-2023 14:35:50 4 acquitted from all the charges and the FIR be quashed.
5/ Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 2 admits that the matter has been amicably settled between both the parties.
6/ Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent no.1/State and respondent no. 2 and also perused the record.
7/ The Hon'ble apex Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Sadhu Ram Singh & Ors., (2017) 5 SCC 350, while considering the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 and 320 of Cr.P.C., has upheld the quashment of non- compoundable offences, pursuant to settlement arrived at by the parties, holding that exercise of judicial restraint vis-à-vis continuance of criminal proceedings after compromise arrived at between the parties, may amount to abuse of process of Court and futile exercise. Taking into account the law laid down by Hon'ble apex Court, in the opinion of this Court, as the compromise between the parties was arrived at between the parties, thus continuation of the prosecution in such matters will be a futile exercise, which will serve no purpose. Under such a situation, Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. can be justifiably invoked to prevent abuse of process of law and wasteful exercise by the Courts below. More so, offence in question are not against the society, but merely affect the victim.
8/ The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uday v. State of Karnataka (2003) 4 SCC 46, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra (2019) 9 SCC 608, Sonu v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2021 SCC OnLine SC 181, Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand (2020) 10 SCC 710, Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT Delhi, in Criminal Appeal No. 1217 of 2022 @ SLP (CRL.) No. 5806 of 2022 had held that even serious offences such as offences under Section 376 of I.P.C can be quashed on Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMOL NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG Signing time: 26-07-2023 14:35:50 5 the basis of the compromise between the parties where the parties are bound by marriage or are close family members. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken a view that continuation of such cases between family members and between a wife and husband would not ensure to anybody's benefit and would only result in further straining of ties within the family.
9/ 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.
10/ Relying upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble apex Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that as the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, therefore, nothing survives in the present matter and continuance of trial in such matter will be a futile exercise, which will serve no purpose. Further, the ingredients are mainly under Sections 420, 374, 506, 34 of IPC and sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(h), 3(2)\(i) of SC & ST Act, therefore, permission to compound the offence is accorded. Under such a situation, inherent power under Section 482 of 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: AMOL NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG Signing time: 26-07-2023 14:35:50 611/ Resultantly, this petition preferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed and the FIR no. 1456/2022 registered at police station - Lasudia, Indore for the offence punishable under sections 420, 374, 506, 34 of IPC and sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(h), 3(2)\(i) of SC & ST Act and all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR. stand quashed against the petitioners.
12/ Let a copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for necessary compliance. No order as to costs.
Certified copy as per rules (ANIL VERMA) JUDGE amol Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMOL NIVRUTTIRAO MAHANAG Signing time: 26-07-2023 14:35:50