IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA

nd

ON THE 2 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 32826 of 2025 UPENDRA ALIAS VIPIN ALIAS VANSH PARASHAR (SHARMA) AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Raghvendra Sharma - Advocate for the petitioners.

Shri Saket Udeniya - PP for the State.

ORDER The present petition has been preferred by the petitioners under Section 528 of the BNSS, seeking quashment of FIR vide Crime No.310/2022 registered at Police Station- Vijaipur, District -Sheopur, for the offence under Sections 498-A, 323, 294, 506 and 406 of IPC and Section 3, 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act as well as all consequential proceedings on the basis of compromise.

2. It appears that parties agreed to settle the matter and therefore, applications vide I.A. No.15590/2025 and I.A. No.15591/2025 have been preferred at the instance of parties and they want to settle the matter. The applications are duly signed by respective parties and same are supported by their affidavits.

3. The Principal Registrar of this Court has duly verified the parties, contents of applications, intent and signatures of parties. Report is attached, same is perused and it appears that compromise has been reached between the parties voluntarily without any threat, inducement and coercion.

4. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the petitioners and respondent No.2 have peacefully settled the dispute between them, therefore, he prayed for quashing of the said FI.R. registered against the petitioners.

5. Counsel for the complainant argued in support of petitioners' prayer for compromise. By referring the affidavit filed by the respondent No.2, has submitted that she is ready to settle the matter.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents appended thereto.

7. A Lean Compromise is better than a Fat Law Suit, instant efforts of the parties indicate the same. It is expected that their bonafide gestures would continue.

8. 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.

9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into 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. 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.

10. To preserve the resources and bonhomie created between the parties arises out of settlement, in the interest of justice, applications for compounding the offence vide I.A. No.15590/2025 and I.A. No.15591/2025 are allowed because no fruitful purpose would be served in continuation of trial. Thus, parties are permitted to compound the offence.

11 . Resultantly, the petition is allowed and FIR vide Crime No.310/2022 registered at Police Station- Vijaipur, District -Sheopur, for the offence under Sections 498-A, 323, 294, 506 and 406 of IPC and Section 3, 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act as well as all consequential proceedings in furtherance thereto, if any, are hereby quashed.

12. Accordingly, this petition stands allowed and disposed of in above terms.

(RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA )

JUDGE Rashid