SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Hanuman Kharwal S/O- Kanaram … vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 September, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

1. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5633/2018

1. Hanuman Kharwal S/o- Kanaram Kharwal, Aged About 31
Years, By Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali
Dhani, Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural.

2. Hari Singh, S/o- Babu Lal Kharwal, Aged About 22 Years, By
Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

3. Savar, S/o- Babu Lal Kharwal, Aged About 20 Years, By Caste
Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

4. Babu Lal Kharwal, S/o- Moolchand Kharwal, Aged About 50
Years, By Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali
Dhani, Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

5. Suresh Kharwal, S/o- Ganesh, Aged About 32 Years, By Caste
Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

6. Bhajan Lal Kharwal, S/o- Kanaram Kharwal, Aged About 28
Years, By Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali
Dhani, Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

7. Mansingh, S/o- Kanaram Kharwal, Aged About 25 Years, By
Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

8. Sitaram Kharwal, S/o- Bhagwan Sahay Kharwal, Aged About
35 Years, By Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali
Dhani, Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

9. Anokhi, W/o- Babulal Kharwal, Aged About 45 Years, By Caste
Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

10. Geeta Devi, W/o- Dharm Singh Kharwal @ Dharma, Aged
About 23 Years, By Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri
Wali Dhani, Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

11. Saroj, W/0- Suresh Kharwal, Aged About 28 Years, By Caste
Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

12. Prabhati, W/o- Ganesh Kharwal, Aged About 65 Years, By
Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural
(2 of 6) [CRLMP-5633/2018]

13. Renu, W/o- Giriraj Kharwal, Aged About 25 Years, By Caste
Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

14. Dharm Singh, S/o- Babu Lal Kharwal, Aged About 26 Years, By
Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

15. Kailash, S/o- Ganesh Kharwal, Aged About 40 Years, By Caste
Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

16. Krishna, W/o- Hanuman Kharwal, Aged About 27 Years, By
Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali Dhani, Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

—-Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

2. Lalita Devi W/o Kailash B/c Mahavar, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, Distt. Jaipur Rural.

—-Respondents

AND

2. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5634/2018

1. Gopal S/o Naval, Aged About 65 Years, By Caste Mahavar,
R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

2. Mukesh, S/o- Gopal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o- Chak
Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

3. Indira, W/o- Mukesh, Aged About 32 Years, By Caste
Mahavar, R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

4. Budhram, W/o- Gopal, Aged About 23 Years, By Caste
Mahavar, R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

5. Kailash, S/o- Gopal, Aged About 31 Years, By Caste Mahavar,
R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

6. Lalaram, S/o- Gopal, Aged About 26 Years, By Caste
Mahavar, R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

7. Rekha, W/o- Budhram, Aged About 20 Years, By Caste
Mahavar, R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

8. Narayani, W/o- Nathu, Aged About 68 Years, By Caste
Mahavar, R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

9. Chotu, S/o- Nathu, Aged About 35 Years, By Caste Mahavar,
R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural
(3 of 6) [CRLMP-5633/2018]

10. Lali, W/o- Manglaram, Aged About 28 Years, By Caste
Mahavar, R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

11. Anita, W/o- Chotu, Aged About 25 Years, By Caste Mahavar,
R/o- Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural

—-Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2. Babu Lal Kharwal, S/o- Moolchand Kharwal, Aged About 50
Years, By Caste Kharwal, R/o- Village Ramsar, Chatri Wali
Dhani, Chak Rojwadi, P.s. Tunga, District Jaipur Rural, Jaipur

—-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Attar Singh Gurjar
For the State : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek, P.P.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

/ Order

12/09/2018

By this common order, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous

(Petition) No.5633/2018 preferred by Hanuman Kharwal and fifteen

others against State of Rajasthan Lalita Devi, along with S.B. Criminal

Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5634/2018 instituted by Goapl ten others

against State of Rajasthan Babu Lal Kharwal, shall be decided

together.

Petitioners and complainant to both the petitions are

residents of two adjoining Villages viz., Ramsar Chatriwali Dhani, Chak

Rojwadi and Village Chak Rojwadi respectively.

On 11.07.2018 at around 06:30 P.M. an occurrence had

ensued and both the sides lodged separate F.I.Rs. containing version

and cross-version.

(4 of 6) [CRLMP-5633/2018]

F.I.R. No.147 dated 12.07.2018 was lodged by Smt. Lalita

Devi, complainant/respondent No.2 to S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous

(Petition) No.5633/2018, wherein she has stated that in all sixteen

accused constituted unlawful assembly, they came to her house,

dragged her father-in-law, named Gopal and gave him injuries. They

also committed obscene act with the complainant – Smt. Lalita Devi.

Smt. Lalita Devi, complainant/respondent No.2 to S.B.

Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5633/2018 is present in person

before this Court. She has been identified by her Counsel Mr. Attar

Singh Gurjar.

Smt. Lalita Devi present in person, has stated that one of

the accused had pulled her ‘saree’.

Another case/F.I.R. bearing No.155/2018, which contains

cross version was lodged by Babu Lal Kharwal.

In the said F.I.R., it is stated that the accused came armed

and caused injuries. The chain of Saroj wife of Suresh was snatched.

In both the petitions containing version and cross-version, a

compromise has been filed.

The accused-petitioners to both F.I.Rs., complainant to both

F.I.Rs. and injured are present in person before this Court. They have

been identified by their respective Counsel – Mr. Manish Sharma and Mr.

Attar Singh Gurjar.

The learned counsel appearing for the parties have

vouchsafed the factum of compromise affected between the parties.

Counsel appearing for the parties have contended that since

all accused to both the petitions and the complainant are living in the

same vicinity, on the intervention of the respectables and elders in

order to promote everlasting peace, amity and harmony, a compromise

has been affected between the parties.

(5 of 6) [CRLMP-5633/2018]

I find merit in the joint submission made by learned counsel

appearing for the parties that no offence punishable under Section 354

I.P.C. is made out. In the present case, one of the accused in a melee

being member of the mob when injuries were being caused pulled saree

of the lady during the course of scuffle. From above, it cannot be said

that the intention of the accused was to outrage the modesty of the

woman.

Considering the fact that on the spur of the moment and

over a trivial matter pertaining to property dispute without any

premeditation, occurrence has taken place, this Court is of the view that

compromise affected between the parties can be accepted.

Counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that

dispute, which is essentially private in nature stands resolved.

Counsel appearing for the petitioners has prayed that since

the dispute has been amicably resolved, the criminal case pending

between the parties as well as impugned F.I.Rs. be quashed.

It has been often held by the Courts that hour of the

compromise is the finest hour between the parties and the Court while

exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash

the proceedings even qua non-compoundable offences.

Relying upon the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Another [(2012) 10 S.C.C. 303], learned counsel for the

petitioners has pleaded that this Court while exercising its inherent

jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. ought to quash the criminal

proceedings, which have been amicably resolved.

Considering the fact that parties have amicably resolved

their dispute, the principle established by the Apex Court in the case of

Gian Singh [supra] and in the interest of justice, this Court, hereby,

quashes impugned F.I.R. No.147/2018 dated 12.07.2018 registered

at Police Station Tunga District Jaipur City (East) for offences punishable
(6 of 6) [CRLMP-5633/2018]

under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354 and 451 of Indian Penal Code and

under Section 3 (1) (10) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and F.I.R. No.155/2018

dated 19.07.2018 registered at same Police Station for offences

punishable under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354 and 451 I.P.C., along

with all subsequent proceedings.

Resultantly, both the petitions are allowed.

Let a copy of this order be placed in the connected petition.

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J

ashok

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation