1 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC 25751/2019 Pravesh Jain Vs. State of MP and Others Gwalior, Dated :29/07/2019 Shri HK Shukla, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri [ENTITY], Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.1/ State.
This petition under [SECTION] of [ACT] has been filed for quashing the FIR in [CASE NUMBER] registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Vidisha for offence under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION] of [ACT] as well as the criminal proceedings in [CASE NUMBER], pending before the Court below.
It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that on 19/01/2018 at about 22:15, the complainant lodged a FIR on the allegation that on 19/01/2018 some hot talks took place between his brother [ENTITY] and accused [ENTITY] on the question of money. The accused [ENTITY] along with other accused persons, including the petitioner came to the house of the complainant. The petitioner and co-accused [ENTITY] were having knife, whereas accused [ENTITY] and [ENTITY] were having Danda (stick) and they started abusing the complainant, therefore, brother and nephew of the complainant objected to it. Then, all the accused persons started assaulting the complainant, his brother and nephew. Co-accused [ENTITY] and petitioner gave knife blows to the complainant whereas the other co-accused persons [ENTITY] and [ENTITY] also gave knife blows to his nephew [ENTITY]. Co- accused [ENTITY] also assaulted the complainant and his brother by means of Danda (stick). The passersby intervened in the matter and all the accused persons ran away. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that qua the petitioner, the complainant has turned hostile in the trial Court. So far as the allegation against the petitioner is concerned, the complainant as well as the petitioner had entered into a compromise and therefore, the criminal proceedings against the petitioner may be quashed.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
According to the FIR, the petitioner had given a knife blow on the back of the complainant. From the copy of the charge sheet filed along with this petition, it appears that the complainant as well as nephew of the complainant [ENTITY], had suffered multiple stab wounds. This active role of the petitioner has been specifically mentioned in the FIR as well as in the statements of the witnesses recorded under [SECTION] of [ACT].
It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that since the complainant has not supported the prosecution case for the petitioner, therefore, the compromise may be accepted and the criminal proceedings qua the petitioner may be quashed.
The Supreme Court in the cases of [PRECEDENT] and [PRECEDENT], has held that if the offence is a heinous one and is against the society, then the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise.
In the present case, multiple knife blows were given to the complainant and the injured [ENTITY]. The incident is alleged to have taken place at the public place. Thus, it is held that since the offence alleged against the petitioner is a heinous offence and is against the society, coupled with the fact that the trial is already pending, this Court is of the considered opinion that no case is made out warranting quashment of FIR as well as the criminal proceedings in [CASE NUMBER], pending before the Court below.
Accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
([ENTITY]) Judge MKB