IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKAR

th

ON THE 26 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 6362 of 2026 AASHISH SEN Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Abhay Saraswat - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Viraj Godha - G.A. for the State.

Shri Rakesh Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the respondent No.2 [COMP].

ORDER

1] They are heard. Perused the case-diary/ record.

2] This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing the FIR dated 16/12/2025 lodged at Crime No.631/2025 at Police Station - Manak Chowk, District Ratlam under Sections 69 and 79 of BNS all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the said crime number.

3] Counsel for the parties have submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court and no purpose would be served to further waste the valuable time of the Court, the result of which is a forgone conclusion. It is also submitted that I.A. No.1792/2026 and I.A. No.1793/2026 under Section 359(2) of BNSS, 2023 have also been filed for compounding of offence and compromise and the factum of compromise has also been verified by the Principal Registrar of this Court on 23/02/2026. In such circumstances, counsel has submitted that the petition may be allowed, and the FIR and the subsequent proceedings may be quashed.

4] In support of his submissions, counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon a decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Kapil Gupta vs.

State of NCT of Delhi and another reported as 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030.

5] Counsel for the respondent No.2 has submitted that he has no objection if the petition is allowed as the prosecutrix herself has already assented to the quashment of the proceedings.

6] Counsel for the respondent No.1/State, has submitted that appropriate orders may be passed.

7] Heard. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the case-diary as also the documents filed on record and the report of the Principal Registrar of this Court dated 23/02/2026 and further considering the fact that the matter has been compromised between the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no purpose would be served to further waste the valuable time of the trial court in this case, the result of which is a forgone conclusion, and thus, is inclined to allow the present petition as further proceedings against the petitioner before the Trial Court would only be an exercise in futility. Reference in this regard may also be had to the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Kapil Gupta (Supra). The relevant paras of the same read as under:-

“13.It can thus be seen that this Court has clearly held that though the Court should be slow in quashing the proceedings wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, the High Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving the charge for the offence charged with. The Court has also to take into consideration as to whether the settlement between the parties is going to result into harmony between them which may improve their mutual relationship.

14.The Court has further held that it is also relevant to consider as to what is stage of the proceedings. It has been observed that if an application is made at a belated stage wherein the evidence has been led and the matter is at the stage of arguments or judgment, the Court should be slow to exercise the power to quash the proceedings. However, if such an application is made at an initial stage before commencement of trial, the said factor will weigh with the court in exercising its power.

15.The facts and circumstances as stated hereinabove are peculiar in the present case.

Respondent No. 2 is a young lady of 23 years. She feels that going through trial in one case, where she