HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 733/2020

1. Hitendra Singh S/o Shri Rajendra Singh, by caste Rajput,
Aged About 31 Years, R/o Udaipur.

2. Rajendra Singh S/o Shri Sardar Singh, By Caste Rajput,
Aged About 58 Years, R/o Udaipur.

—-Petitioners
Versus

1. The State of Rajasthan

2. Smt. Amrit Kunwar @ Bhavna D/o Sh. Ratan Singh Ji and
W/o Sh. Hitendra Singh, R/o 5/106, 100 Fit Road,
Goverdhan Vilas, Udaipur.

—-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saurabh Soni.
For Respondent(s) : Ms .Rajlaxmi Singh Choudhary, P.P.

Mr.Kunal Sancheti.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

Order

19/02/2020

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material

available on record.

2. The petitioners herein have been convicted and sentenced

vide Judgment dated 18.10.2019 passed by the learned Judicial

Magistrate, Udaipur City (North), Udaipur in Criminal Case

No.14/2019 as below:

Hitendra Singh
Offences Sentences Fine Fine Default
sentences
498A IPC 3 Years’ S.I. Rs.2,000/ 3 Months’
Additional S.I.

494 IPC 3 Years’ S.I. Rs.5,000/ 6 Months’
Additional S.I.

406 IPC 1 Year’s S.I. Rs.2,000/ 3 Months’
Additional S.I.

(Downloaded on 25/02/2020 at 08:38:49 PM)

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-733/2020]

Rajendra Singh
Offences Sentences Fine Fine Default
Under sentences
Sections

498A IPC 3 Years’ S.I. Rs.2,000/ 3 Months’
Additional S.I.
406 IPC 1 Year’s S.I. Rs.2,000/ 3 Months’
Additional S.I.

3. The petitioners have preferred an appeal against the said

Judgment which has been registered as Criminal Appeal

No.305/2019 and is pending consideration before the Additional

Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases), Udaipur.

4. The instant misc. petition has been presented by the

petitioners with a prayer to quash the order dated 06.12.2019

passed by the appellate court whereby, it has refused to

compound the offence under Section 498A of the IPC. A

compromise deed was filed by the accused before the appellate

court which stands accepted to the extent of the offences under

Sections 406 and 494 of the IPC but was rejected for the

remaining offence (Section 498A IPC) as the same is non-

compoundable.

5. Learned counsel Shri Saurabh Soni representing the accused

petitioners and Shri Kunal Sancheti, Advocate representing the

respondent No.2 complainant urge that the parties have mutually

settled the entire dispute and the conviction of the accused

petitioners as recorded by the trial court deserves to be quashed

on the ground of compromise.

(Downloaded on 25/02/2020 at 08:38:49 PM)

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-733/2020]

6. In this background, I am of the opinion that conviction of the

accused petitioners as recorded by the trial court deserves to be

quashed by accepting the compromise in light of Supreme Court

decision in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab Anr.

reported in JT 2012(9) SC-426.

7. Accordingly, the compromise application filed by the

respondent complainant before the appellate court is accepted and

consequently, the conviction and sentences awarded to the

petitioners by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur City

(North), Udaipur in Criminal Case No.14/2019 are hereby

quashed. As a result, the Criminal Appeal No.305/2019 filed by

the petitioners against the said judgment which is pending before

the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases),

Udaipur is rendered infructuous and is dismissed as such.

8. The misc. petition is allowed in these terms. Stay application

is disposed of.

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J

/Tikam/ 76

(Downloaded on 25/02/2020 at 08:38:49 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)