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

th

ON THE 9 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 52709 of 2025 RISHIKESH CHANDEL AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Rajendra Shakya - Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms Kalpana Parmar - Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1/State, Shri Kamlesh Kumar Kori - Advocate for the respondent [R-2].

ORDER By invoking inherent powers of this Court, the present petition has been preferred by petitioners under Section 528 of BNSS seeking quashment of FIR bearing Crime No.271/2025 registered at Police Station Ishagarh District Ashoknagar for the offence punishable under Sections 64(2)(f), 64(2)(m), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), 3(5) of BNS and other consequential criminal proceedings initiated therefrom.

2. Alongwith the petition, both the parties have filed I.A. Nos.23989 of

2025 and 23990 of 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 21.11.2025 passed by this Court, the factum of compromise has been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court, who has recorded the statements of respondent No.2 as well as petitioners and has submitted the report that the parties have arrived at compromise voluntarily without any threat, inducement and coercion.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise. Learned counsel for the applicant, placing reliance upon the case of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675, submits that to prevent abuse of process of court and to secure ends of justice, the entire proceedings as well as FIR deserve to be quashed in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the parties have amicably settled the dispute and have entered into compromise.

5. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor for State has opposed the prayer for quashing of the proceedings as well as charge sheet of the case on the basis of the compromise. He submits that some of the offences, are non- compoundable and heinous as well; they are not private/personal in nature, affecting only the individuals but they have impact on the society; they are wrong to the society and as such neither the offences can be compounded nor the proceedings can be quashed on the basis of compromise.

7. This Court considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the present application.

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 Cr.P.C. which provides for saving of inherent powers of High Court. Section 482 Cr.P.C., reads as under:-

"Saving of inherent powers of High Court. Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice."

10. The inherent power of the Courts set up by the Constitution is a power that inheres in such Courts being Court of record. This power is vested by the Constitution itself, inter-alia, under Article 215 of the Constitution of India. Every High Court has inherent power to act ex-debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice, for the administration of which alone it exists or to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court. Section 482 Cr.P.C. saves inherent powers of the High Court