HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Dharmendra @ Sonu – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 12014/2019
##PAGE1##
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3928
1 MCRC-12014-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
th
ON THE 30 OF JANUARY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 12014 of 2019
DHARMENDRA @ SONU
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Pramod Kumar Pachori - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Vikram Pippal Ga appearing on behalf of Advocate General.
Shri Rahul Ojha, learned counsel for the respondent [R-2].
ORDER
By invoking inherent powers of this Court, the present petition has
been preferred by petitioner under Section 528 of BNSS/482 of Cr.P.C.
seeking quashment of FIR bearing Crime No.15/2013 registered at Police
Station Tharet District Datia for the offence punishable under Sections 279,
337, 338, 307 of IPC and other subsequent criminal proceedings initiated
therefrom.
2. Alongwith the petition, both the parties have filed I.A. Nos.
19223/2025 and 19225/2025 stating therein that the dispute between the
parties has been resolved and they have entered into compromise with no
intention to pursue the matter further.
3. In compliance of order dated 13.10.2025 passed by this Court, the
factum of compromise has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETU
SHASHANK
Signing time: 1/31/2026
12:04:00 PM
##PAGE2##NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3928
2 MCRC-12014-2019
Court, who has recorded the statements of respondents No.2 as well as
petitioner and has submitted the report that the parties have arrived at
compromise voluntarily without any threat, inducement and coercion.
4. In view of the above, it would be apposite to survey the law in
respect of compounding in non-compoundable case, the Apex Court in the
case of K. Bharthi Devi and Another v. State of Telangana and Another,
reported in (2024) 10 SCC 384 has held as under:
"33. It could thus be seen that the learned three- Judge Bench of this Court inG ian Singh v. State
of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 held that B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil
Merchant v. CBI, (2008) 9 SCC 677 and Manoj Sharma vs. State, (2008) 16 SCC 1 were
correctly decided.
34. It has been held that there are certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear
civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like
transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or a
family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have
settled all disputes between them amicably, the High Court would be justified in quashing the
"
criminal proceedings, even if the offences have not been made compoundable.
5. The Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and
Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 after considering the the provisions
of Section 320 and 482 of the Cr.P.C held that the compounding can he
permitted in a non- compoundable offence. Relevant part of the order of the
order reads as under :-
"Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between an offender
and victim is not the same thing as compounding of offence. They are different and not
interchangeable. Strictly speaking, the power of compounding of offences given to a court
under Section 320 is materially different from the quashing of criminal proceedings by the High
Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. In compounding of offences, power of a criminal
court is circumscribed by the provisions contained in Section 320 and the court is guided solely
and squarely thereby while, on the other hand, the formation of opinion by the High Court for
quashing a criminal offence or criminal proceeding or criminal complaint is guided by the
material on record as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power although
the ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment. B.S.Joshi, Nikhil
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NEETU
SHASHANK
Signing time: 1/31/2026
12:04:00 PM
##PAGE3##
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.