IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE

th

ON THE 11 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 32189 of 2024 NABBE @ LAVKUSH Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

None for the petitioner.

Ms. Kalpana Parmar - Public Prosecutor for the State.

ORDER By invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure), the present petition has been preferred seeking quashment of FIR bearing Crime No. 760/2021 registered at Police Station Dabra, District Gwalior, for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 450 of the IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, including Sessions Case No.

268 of 2021, on the basis of compromise.

As per the prosecution story, respondent No.2/prosecutrix appeared at the concerned Police Station along with her paternal aunt Rani Vaghel and her father Harvansh Vaghel and lodged an oral report alleging that the accused, Lavkush Vaghel, had committed rape upon her against her will. On the basis of the said allegations, the aforesaid FIR came to be registered.

Along with the petition, the parties have filed I.A. Nos. 16134/2024 and 16135/2024 stating that they have amicably resolved their dispute and have entered into a compromise without any intention to pursue the matter further.

In compliance with the order dated 13.09.2024 passed by this Court, the compromise was verified by the Principal Registrar, who recorded the statements of the prosecutrix as well as the petitioner/accused and submitted a report stating that the compromise has been entered into voluntarily and without any threat, inducement or coercion.

None appears for the petitioner even in the second round.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the petition and submitted that the offences alleged are heinous and non-compoundable in nature. It is contended that such offences are not private disputes confined to individuals but are crimes against society, and therefore cannot be quashed merely on the basis of compromise.

Heard counsel for the State and perused the record.

The scope and ambit of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(now Section 528 BNSS) is well settled. Though the High Court possesses wide plenitude of powers to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of Court, such power is required to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection.

The Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC

303; State of M.P. vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688; and Parbatbhai Aahir vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 has categorically held that heinous and serious offences of mental depravity such as murder, rape, dacoity, etc., cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise, as such offences are not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society.

In Shimbhu vs. State of Haryana, (2014) 13 SCC 318 and State of M.P. vs. Madan Lal, (2015) 7 SCC 681, the Apex Court has unequivocally held that rape is a non-compoundable offence and a crime against society. Compromise between the victim and the accused cannot be a ground for quashing proceedings or for adopting a lenient approach, as such a course would be against public policy and the dignity of women This Court in the matter of Rishikesh Chandel & Others vs. State of M.P. & Another (M.Cr.C. No.52709 of 2025, decided on 09.02.2026) has held as under:

"8. The short question which requires consideration is, whether in the exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the FIR as well as the entire proceedings can be quashed in the cases involving an offence of Rape in view of the compromise entered into by the parties?

9. Before scrutinizing the facts of the present case and rephrasing the scope of powers exercisable by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it would be appropriate to understand Section 482 C