Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Gajanand S/O Shri Murari Lal B/C Vaish vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:20044) on 29 April, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Upman
Bench: Anil Kumar Upman
[2024:RJ-JP:20044]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 475/2019
Gajanand S/o Shri Murari Lal B/c Vaish, R/o Village Rajpur, Ps
Nadoti, District Karauli, Rajasthan, At Present 739, Sanjay Nagar
Kachchi Basti Jaipur, Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
2. Atma Ram Vaishnav S/o Sh. Mishri Lal Vaishnav, R/o
Village Khajuri, Tehsil Jahajpur, District Bheelwara,
Rajasthan, At Present 151, Sanjay Nagar, Ajmer Road,
Jaipur, Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Birendra Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP
Mr. Devesh Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order
29/04/2024
1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C with a prayer to quash proceedings pending before learned Additional Civil Judge cum Metropolitan Magistrate No. 20, Jaipur metropolitan Jaipur in criminal case No. 2606/2012 (3504/2010) arising out of FIR No. 223/2009, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 & 120-B of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing chargesheet before the learned court below, the parties entered into compromise and decided to withdraw all litigation, pending (Downloaded on 10/05/2024 at 09:18:13 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:20044] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-475/2019] between them and agreed to file a compromise application before the learned trial court. Both the parties filed an application on 17.09.2012 before the learned trial court seeking attestation of compromise for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. However, inadvertently, offence under Section 474 IPC could not be mentioned in the said application. The learned trial court dismissed the application and declined to attest the compromise. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred S.B. Criminal Misc. Petiion No.3768/2012 before this Court against the rejection of the compromise application. Vide order dated 12.02.2015, the aforementioned misc. petition came to be allowed and the criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120B IPC were dropped but since due to typographical error, offence under Section 474 IPC was not mentioned in the application as well as in the Misc. Petition (No.3768/2012), the trial court continued the proceedings of the criminal case for offence under Section 474 IPC. Thereafter, the petitioner as well as the complainant again moved an application along with compromise for attestation and quashing of the proceedings for remaining offence under Section 474 IPC but the learned trial court rejected the application vide order dated 24.05.2015 and refused to attest the compromise qua offence under Section 474 IPC.
3. Learned counsel submits that in these circumstances, petitioner has again approached this Court by way of this misc. petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings pending before learned trial court under Section 474 of IPC on the basis of compromise.
(Downloaded on 10/05/2024 at 09:18:13 PM)
[2024:RJ-JP:20044] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-475/2019]
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the instant misc. petition. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the complainant has no objection if the entire criminal proceedings of the criminal case No. 2606/2012 (3504/2010) proceedings are quashed.
5. In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties; the material made available for my perusal; considering that the petitioner and the complainant have resolved their dispute amicably, this Court is of the view that in order to establish peace and harmony between the petitioner and complainant and also finding that the present case is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC 604], the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties although the offence under Section 474 IPC is not compoundable.
6. In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed. The entire criminal proceedings, including the order dated 24.04.2015, pending before learned Additional Civil Judge cum Metropolitan Magistrate No. 20 Jaipur Metropolitan in criminal case No. 2606/2012 (3504/2010) arising out of FIR No. 223/2009, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur are quashed and set aside. Consequence to follow.
7. The stay application also stands disposed of.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J LALIT MOHAN /107 (Downloaded on 10/05/2024 at 09:18:13 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)