Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sonu Rawat @ Gajendra vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 29 January, 2018
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC 3225/2018
Sonu Rawat alias Gajendra vs. State of MP and Another
Gwalior, dtd. 29-1-2018
Smt. Uma Kushwah, counsel for the applicant.
Shri Girdhari Singh Chauhan, Public Prosecutor for
the respondent No.1/ State.
This application under Section 482 of CrPC has been filed for quashing the FIR in Crime No.259/2017 registered at Police Station Dabra Dehat,District Gwalior for offence under Sections 353, 186, 384, 34 of IPC, on the basis of compromise.
The necessary facts for the disposal of the present application in short are that Surendra Singh Tomar, Head Constable, Police Station Dabra Dehat, District Gwalior registered a FIR on the basis of a written complaint sent by SHO, Police Station Dabra on the allegation that on 19/12/2017 at about 2:30 pm, while the Naib Tahsildar was taking a round in the locality, saw that a Sonalika tractor was illegally transporting sand in its trolley. The tractor was stopped and royalty receipts and documents of the tractor were sought but the driver could not produce the same. Thereafter, the tractor was seized on the spot and was handed over to the custody of the Kotwar of village Maharajpura and the driver was taken into custody and was sent to Dabra. Thereafter, the Kotwar of village Maharajpura, Gwalior came to the office of the Naib Tahsildar and informed that the applicant came on a motorcycle and he threw him on the ground from the tractor and instructed the driver of the tractor to take away the tractor after unloading the sand. The 2 driver after unloading the sand, took away the tractor. The Kotwar of village Maharajpura was also beaten by the applicant as a result of which, he has sustained certain injuries. The Kotwar of village Maharajpura was sent for medical examination and the complainant was sent for registering the FIR against the applicant.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the respondent No.2 who is the Kotwar of village Maharajpura has entered into the compromise with the applicant and, therefore, the FIR may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties.
Per contra, the application is opposed by the State Counsel. It is submitted that in fact, the respondent No.2 is not the sole complainant. The tractor was found illegally transporting the sand which was seized and was handed over to the custody of the respondent No.2. The applicant thereafter came along with one driver and not only had beaten the respondent No.2 but also took away the tractor. It is an offence against the society as well as against the environment because due to illegal excavation of sand not only the marine life is being put into danger but the illegal mining is also adversely affecting the environment of the area. It is further submitted that the illegal mining of the sand is going on in spite of best efforts being made by the authorities to stop the same.
Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.
3reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 has held that if the offence is heinous and is against the society, then the proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties.
So far as the present case is concerned, under the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the respondent No.2 was the sole complainant. The tractor and trolley was caught by the Naib Tahsildar which was illegally transporting the sand without payment of royalty and even the driver was not having any documents of the tractor. The tractor was seized and handed over to the custody of the respondent No.2. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 was beaten by the applicant and the tractor was taken away. It is clear that not only the respondent No.2 is the aggrieved person but the Naib Tahsildar who had caught the concerning tractor, is also complainant in the matter. Secondly, the FIR was lodged on the written complaint of the Naib Tahsildar and thus, until and unless the Naib Tahsildar enters into the compromise with the applicant, the proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise. Furthermore, if the facts of the case are considered, it is clear that the illegal mining or excavation of the sand in the locality is going on in spite of various effective measures which are being taken by the State and its enforcing agency. The illegal act of miscreants is not only detriment for the marine life but it is also danger to the environment and weather.
Considering the totality of the facts and 4 circumstances of the case and the allegations made against the applicant, this Court is of the considered view that the FIR in Crime No.259/2017 registered at Police Station Dabra Dehat, District Gwalior for offence under Sections 353, 186, 384, 34 of IPC cannot be quashed on the ground of compromise. When this Court is already of the view that the proceedings cannot be quashed, then no fruitful purpose will be served by directing the parties to appear before the Principal Registrar of this Court for verification of compromise.
Accordingly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge MKB MAHENDRA KUMAR BARIK 2018.02.01 18:40:41 +05'30'