Abduction From Public Spot, Assault & Making False Video With Self-Incriminating Words Under Threat Is Heinous Offence: MP High Court

While refusing to quash a FIR following compromise between parties, the Madhya Pradesh High Court held that abduction from a public place, assaulting by butt of pistol and making a false video containing self-incriminating admissions under threat would come under the ambit of heinous offence.Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia in his order observed, “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.”The court was hearing a plea for quashing an FIR for offences punishable under BNS Sections 308(5) (Extortion), 127(2) (Wrongful Confinement), 115(2) (Voluntarily causing hurt), 296 (Obscene Acts and Songs) and 3(5) (Act done in furtherance of common intention). As per the prosecution, the complainant was standing with his friends when a car approached and the persons inside the car made him sit in the car, stating that they wanted to talk. When the complainant refused by saying that he does not know who they were referring to, then the person driving the car, took him away where by the accused threatened and demanded Rs. 5,00,000. When the complainant said that he had no money, the other co-accused exhorted to shoot him. Thereafter, one of the co-accused inflicted butt blow of pistol near the complainant's eye and by threatening him got Rs. 16,000 deposited through Google Pay. Thereafter, the complainant was also made to hold the pistol and a video was made by compelling him to say that he had come to kill Deependra Kansana and the amount of Rs. 16,000 has been given by him voluntarily. Thereafter, the accused persons demanded further amount of Rs.4,84,000 threateing the complainant that they would make the video viral and that he would be implicated if he narrated the incident to anyone.An application was filed in the matter seeking quashing of the FIR on the ground of compromise. The question before the Court was whether the allegations made in the FIR were simple in nature or are heinous and against the society.Going through the contents of the FIR, the Court noted that not only the complainant was abducted but also assaulted by butt of the pistol. Further, the complainant was also threatened and a false video containing self-incriminating admissions was made.Thus, the Court opined that the aforesaid offences were heinous in nature and against the society. Referring to the judgement of Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) and Narinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2014) the Court said that the nature of allegations do not warrant quashment of FIR on the basis of compromise.The Court therefore refused to quash the FIR and dismissed the application.Case Title: Sourav Gurjar And Others Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others, Misc. Criminal Case No. 14536 Of 2025Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 81Click Here To Read/Download Order

Abduction From Public Spot, Assault & Making False Video With Self-Incriminating Words Under Threat Is Heinous Offence: MP High Court

Anukriti Mishra

Tags