Back
2026 Supreme(MP) 228
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
GAJENDRA SINGH, J.
Vivek And Others - Applicants
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
MISC. Criminal Case No. 8946 of 2026
Decided On : 04-08-2026
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings
Act Referred
BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA : S.105, S.106, S.238
ARMS ACT : S.30
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE : S.482
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.226
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.304
Headnote
(B) Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Scope and ambit - High Court's exercise of power - To be exercised only if allegations do not constitute offences or proceedings are malafide - Not to be used for serious offences even if parties reach a settlement. (Paras 7 and 9)
Facts of the case:
The applicants were engaged in target practice shooting with a licensed firearm when a bullet allegedly struck and caused the death of the deceased. The applicants sought to quash the FIR and subsequent proceedings, citing lack of intent, absence of enmity, and a compromise reached with the victim's family.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the evidence, including CCTV footage, indicated the applicants were actively involved in unsafe firing practices. Since the offences are non-compoundable and impact the public at large, the compromise reached with the victim's heirs did not warrant quashing the proceedings.
Issues: Whether the FIR satisfies the Bhajan Lal parameters for quashment and whether an FIR for a serious non-compoundable offence can be quashed based on a settlement between the accused and the victim's legal heirs.
Ratio Decidendi: Serious criminal acts that threaten societal safety and integrity, such as culpable homicide not amounting to murder, cannot be treated as private disputes even if reconciled through a settlement; hence, the court refused to exercise its inherent power of quashment.
Result: Petition dismissed.
For the Applicants :Shri Yogesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondents:Shri Romil Verma, GA, Shri Vivek Singh, Senior Advocate with Shri Vipin Parmar, Advocate.
ORDER :
GAJENDRA SINGH, J.
This present petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred seeking quashment of the FIR giving rise to Crime No.184/2025, dated 06.04.2025, registered at Police Station Tejaji Nagar, District Indore (MP) for the commission of the offence punishable under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Thereafter, a final report No.01/2026 was filed on 09.01.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 105 and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 30 of the Arms Act, 1959. The petition also seeks quashment of the consequential proceedings pending in Regular Criminal Trial No.335 of 2026 before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore (MP) against the applicants/accused persons.
2. The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass that one Madanlal Yadav, son of Bhagirath Yadav, a resident of Umri Kheda, Khandwa Road, Indore, (MP) was brought to M.Y. Hospital, Indore, at about 7:30 p.m. on 05.04.2025 who already succumbs to gunshot injuries. It was initially intimated to the hospital authorities that the deceased had sustained the gunshot injury while cleaning a gun. An enquiry conducted pursuant to unnatural death Case No.002/2025, registered at Police Station- Tejaji Nagar, District Indore (Urban), revealed that the cause of death was shock and haemorrhage resulting from a firearm injury to the thoracic region of the body. The enquiry further disclosed that, at about 8:30 p.m. on 05.04.2025, while the deceased was taking water near the pipeline in front of the gate of J.J. Farm, situated at J.J. Public School, Village Umri Kheda where the Madanlal and his wife were residing and falls within the territorial jurisdiction of Police Station- Tejaji Nagar, District Indore (MP). It was further disclosed that the incident occurred when the applicants were engaged in target practice shooting using a 0.32 bore pistol issued to applicant No.1, Vivek Singhal, under Arms Licence No.28/Indore/Home/2022 valid up to 09.05.2025. The C.C.T.V. footage collected during the investigation also revealed that the applicants were engaged in target practice shooting at the place of occurrence. The investigation further revealed that the bullet which caused the death of Madanlal Yadav was allegedly fired from the point where the applicants were carrying out target practice and travelled to the place marked as Point 'F' in the spot map prepared on 05.04.2025 flying from the boundary wall of four feet and piercing the grill of plastic sheet before striking the deceased. It is further alleged that when the wife of the deceased questioned the applicants as to why they had shot her husband then applicant No.1, Vivek Singhal took the injured Madanlala Yadav in his car to M.Y. Hospital, Indore and informed the hospital authorities that the deceased had sustained the gunshot injury while cleaning a gun. Leela Bai, wife of the deceased immediately objected to the said version and stated that the information given by Vivek Singhal is false. Thereafter, Vivek left the hospital. During the course of investigation, a rifle was also seized from the room of applicant No.1, Vivek Singhal, at about 4:25 p.m. on 11.04.2025.
3. The present petition has been preferred primarily on the ground that the FIR and the material collected during the investigation, even if accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie disclose the commission of the offence alleged against the applicants. It is contended that the initial information received through the telephone operator indicated that the deceased had been brought to the hospital by his son Ashish Yadav and not by applicant No.1, Vivek Singhal and contrary to this on the next day of alleged incident the complainant made a false oral complaint against the applicant no.1 Vivek Singhal and made his entire family accused in the commission of an alleged offence. Bare perusal of the spot map which reflected that, there is n
