Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.
Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Udai Lal vs State Ofrajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:9792) on 26 February, 2024
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2024:RJ-JD:9792]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 1223/2024
1. Udai Lal S/o Dolat Ram, Aged About 72 Years, R/o Mandir
Ke Pass Gangrar District Chittorgarh
2. Ratan Lal S/o Mangi Lal, Aged About 56 Years, R/o
Pachhmata Rajsamand Rajasthan
3. Gaytri Devi W/o Ratan Lal, Aged About 51 Years, R/o
Pachhmata Rajsamand Rajasthan
—-Petitioners
Versus
1. State Ofrajasthan, Through Pp
2. Minakshi W/o Naresh D/o Prakash, R/o Pali Rajasthan
—-Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pritam Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, P.P.
Mr. Pratap Singh, for respondent.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
26/02/2024
1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been filed under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of the First Information
Report No.168/2019 registered at the Police Station Gogunda,
District Udaipur for the offences under Sections 498A, 406, 354B
and 34 of the IPC.
2. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that the dispute
in between the parties has been resolved through an amicable
settlement and now, there remains no controversy in between
them and the parties do not wish to continue the criminal
proceedings further.
(Downloaded on 27/02/2024 at 08:43:45 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:9792] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-1223/2024]
3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for
complainant-respondent admits the fact of compromise and
submits that he is willing if the FIR and the proceedings are
quashed on the basis of compromise entered in between the
parties.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.
5. Heard, perused the material available on record more
particularly the police report, nature of allegation and the
compromise deed executed in between the parties. The dispute is
related to a matrimonial strife. The parties to the lis have resolved
their dispute amicably and do not wish to continue the criminal
proceedings and have jointly prayed for quashing of the same. The
offence alleged in this matter is non-compoundable, however,
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of
Punjab [(2012)] 10 SCC 303] has propounded that if it is
convinced that offences are entirely personal in nature and do not
affect the public peace or tranquility and where it feels that
quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would
bring about peace and would secure ends of justice, the High
Court should not hesitate to quash the same by exercising the
inherent powers vested in it. It is observed that in such cases, the
prosecution becomes a lame prosecution and pursuing such a
lame prosecution would be a waste of time and energy that will
also unsettle the compromise and obstruct restoration of peace.
This Court is aptly guided by the principles propounded by Hon’ble
the Supreme Court and feels that where the dispute is essentially
(Downloaded on 27/02/2024 at 08:43:45 PM)
[2024:RJ-JD:9792] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-1223/2024]
inter se between the parties, either they are relatives, neighbors
or having business relationship and which does not affect the
society at large, then in such cases, with a view to maintain
harmonious relationships between the two sides, to end-up the
dipute in between them permanently as well as for restitution of
relationship, the High Court should exercise its inherent power to
quash the FIR and all other subsequent proceedings initiated
thereto.
6. Here in this case, though the offences are not compoundable
but the parties have settled the dispute amicably and that is
essentially in between the parties which is not affecting public
peace and tranquility, therefore, with a view to maintain the
harmony and to resolve the dispute finally in vetween the parties,
it is deemed appropriate to quash the FIR and all further
proceedings undertaken in pursuance thereof.
7. Accordingly, the criminal misc. Petition is allowed and the FIR
mentioned above, and all further proceedings undertaken in
pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside. The SHO
concerned is directed to file a closure report with the concerned
Judicial Magistrate within a period of one month from the date of
receiving copy of this order.
6. The stay petition also stands disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
314-Ravi Khandelwal
(Downloaded on 27/02/2024 at 08:43:45 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
