Alleged Offences Of Abduction, Assault With Pistol, And Creating False Video With Self-Incriminating Admissions Are Heinous: Madhya Pradesh High Court Refuses To Quash FIR
|The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed an application filed under Section 528 of the BNSS on the ground of compromise.
While remarking that the alleged offences, including abduction, assault with a pistol, and the creation of a false video with self-incriminating admissions, are heinous, the Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to quash an FIR.
The Court dismissed an application under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) [Section 482 of CrPC] seeking the quashment of an FIR on the ground of compromise, which was registered under Sections 308(5), 127(2), 115(2), 296 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. The Court had to determine whether the allegations made in the FIR were of simple in nature or heinous and against the society.
A Single Bench of Justice GS Ahluwalia held, “Abduction from a public place and then assaulting him by the butt of pistol and thereafter preparing a false video containing some self-incriminating admissions by complainant cannot be said to be an offence which is not heinous or not against the society.”
Advocate Dhirendra Singh Niranjan appeared for the Applicants, while Public Prosecutor Mohit Shivhare represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The prosecution alleged that a written complaint was filed with the Police alleging that the accused had abducted and assaulted the complainant.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court noted, “If the entire FIR is read, then not only it is a case where complainant was abducted but he was assaulted by butt of the pistol. Thereafter, a video was also prepared by compelling the complainant to hold pistol and make a statement that he had come to kill one Deependra Kansana and second video was prepared by compelling him to speak that he has voluntarily given Rs.16,000/.”
Consequently, the Court ordered, “Accordingly, in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab & anr. reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, it is held that the nature of allegations does not warrant quashment of FIR on the basis of compromise.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Application.
Cause Title: Sourav Gurjar & Ors. v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:MPHC-GWL:7933)
Appearance:
Applicants: Advocate Dhirendra Singh Niranjan
Respondents: Public Prosecutor Mohit Shivhare; Advocate Hotam Singh Rathore