Harsh vs State & Anr on 29 November, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1375 / 2017
Harsh Parihar S/o Shri Rakesh Parihar, By Caste Ghanchi, Resident
of 18, Harsh Jodhpur Restaurant, in Front of Lodha Petrol Pump,
National Highway No. 8, Sukher, Bhuwana, District Udaipur.
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan.

2. Smt. Komal @ Priyanka W/o Harsh Parihar D/o Shiv Lal Solanki,
By Caste Ghanchi, Resident of 112, Lane Behind Post Office,
Subhash Chowk, Ratanada, Jodhpur.
—-Respondents
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Ramesh Panwar.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.V.S.Rajpurohit, P.P., Mr.Ram Avtar.
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order
29/11/2017

The instant misc. petition has been filed seeking quashing of

the proceedings of the Cr. Case No.135/2013 pending in the Court

of learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.2, Jodhpur Metro arising out

of FIR No.135/2013 registered at the Women Police Station,

District Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 498A and 323 of

the I.P.C. on the basis of the compromise.

The respondent No.2 is the first informant and the petitioner

No.1 is her husband.

Both the learned counsel for the parties have submitted that

the parties have resumed the matrimonial relationship and are

residing happily with each other and there remains no disputes

between them and thus, the proceedings going on in the trial

court should be quashed.
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-1375/2017]

They submit that a combined application for termination of

the proceedings through a mutual compromise was filed in the

Court below. The trial Court vide order dated 21.2.2017 has

rejected the said application. They urge that the continuance of

the proceedings against the petitioner before the trial court may

unsettle the compromise arrived at between the parties. Thus, it

was prayed that the same be quashed.

In this view of the matter and looking to the guidelines

issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs.

State of Punjab Anr. reported in JT 2012(9) SC-426, it is

apparent that further continuance of the proceedings going on

against the petitioners in the learned trial Court cannot be said to

be expedient in the interest of justice. If the proceedings are

allowed to continue, it may result into the compromise being

unsettled.

Accordingly, the misc. petition is allowed and the

proceedings of the Cr. Case No.135/2013 pending in the Court of

learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.2, Jodhpur Metro arising out of

FIR No.135/2013 registered at the Women Police Station, District

Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 498A and 323 of the

I.P.C. are hereby quashed. Stay petition is also disposed of.

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J.

/tarun goyal/

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *