Salman Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:19936
1 MCRC-24934-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA
th
ON THE 8 OF JULY, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 24934 of 2026
SALMAN KHAN
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Akhilesh Dubey - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Harish Sharma - Dy. GA for respondent No.1/State.
Shri Trishant Mishra - Advocate for respondent No.2.
ORDER
The present petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section
528 of the BNSS seeking quashment of FIR bearing Crime No.542/2024
registered at Police Station- Maharajpura, District Gwalior for the offence
under Sections 137(2), 70(2) of BNS and Section 5(g)/6 of POCSO Act and
consequential proceedings arising thereto (Case No.203/2024), on the basis
of compromise.
2 . It appears that parties agreed to settle the matter and therefore,
applications vide I.A. Nos.10646/2026 and 10648/2026 have been preferred
at the instance of parties and they want to settle the matter. The applications
are duly signed by respective parties and same are supported by their
affidavits.
3. The Principal Registrar of this Court has duly verified the parties,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 7/10/2026
5:34:23 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:19936
2 MCRC-24934-2026
contents of applications, intent and signatures of parties. Report is attached,

same is perused and it appears that compromise has been reached between
the parties voluntarily without any threat, inducement and coercion.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that respondent No.2 and
petitioner have entered into compromise and decided that when the
prosecutrix will attain the majority, they will perform Nikah and now they
want to settle their dispute between them. Therefore, petitioner prayed
for quashing of the F.I.R. registered against him.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and prayed for its
rejection.
6. Counsel for the complainant argued in support of petitioner's prayer
for compromise. He referred the affidavit filed by the
respondent/complainant and they are ready to settle the matter.
7 . Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the
documents appended thereto.
8. A Lean Compromise is better than a Fat Law Suit , instant efforts of
the parties indicate the same. It is expected that their bonafide gestures would
continue.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of judgments Jagdish Channa
& others Vs. State of Haryana & another, AIR 2008 SC 1968, Madan Mohan
Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2008 SC 1969, Shiji Vs. Radhika &
Another, (2011) 10 SCC 705, Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab
(2014) 6 SCC 466, B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another
(2003) 4 SCC 675, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 7/10/2026
5:34:23 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:19936
3 MCRC-24934-2026
Parbatbhai Ahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State

of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641, laid down that even in non-
compoundable cases on the basis of compromise, criminal proceedings can
be quashed so that valuable time of the court can be saved and utilized in
other material cases.
10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into
account the law laid down by the Apex Court, in the opinion of this Court,
continuance of trial in such matter will be a futile exercise which will serve
no purpose. Under such a situation, Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be justifiably
invoked to prevent abuse of the process of law and wasteful exercise by the
courts below.
11. To preserve the resources and bonhomie created between the
parties arises out of settlement, in the interest of justice, application for
compounding the offence vide I.A. os.10646/2026 and
10648/2026 are allowed because no fruitful purpose would be served in
continuation of trial. Thus, parties are permitted to compound the offence.
1 2 . Resultantly, the petition is allowed and FIR bearing Crime
No.542/2024 registered at Police Station- Maharajpura, District Gwalior for
the offence under Sections 137(2), 70(2) of BNS and Section 5(g)/6 of
POCSO Act and consequential proceedings arising thereto, if any, (Case
No.203/2024) are hereby quashed solely with respect to the present petitioner
on the basis of compromise.
13. Accordingly, this petition stands allowed and disposed of in above
terms.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 7/10/2026
5:34:23 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:19936
4 MCRC-24934-2026
14. It is clarified that the Trial Court shall not be influenced by this

order; the trial shall proceed against the remaining co-accused persons and
be decided in accordance with the law.
(RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA )
JUDGE
(alok)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ALOK KUMAR
Signing time: 7/10/2026
5:34:23 PM