Allowed

Narsa Ram and Ors. v. the State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajasthan HC27 May 2019CRLMP/163/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings for extortion and cheating (IPC Sections 384, 385) based on a confirmed compromise deed between the parties, applying the Supreme Court ratio in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings in Criminal Regular Case No.856/2014 for offences under Sections 384 and 385 IPC against petitioners are quashed on the basis of compromise deed. Stay petition also disposed of.

Narsa Ram and Ors. Vs the State of Rajasthan and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 163/2018

¶4

Narsa Ram Son Of Poonma Ji Purohit, Village Tuwa, Tehsil And District Sirohi.

¶5

Ganesh Ram Son Of Galba Ji Purohit, Jaswantpura, District Sirohi.

¶6

Heera Lal Son Of Prakash Ji, By Caste Purohit, Resident Of Sildar Village, District Sirohi.

¶7

Sona Ram Son Of Hakma Ji, By Caste Purohit, Resident Of Village Bhermandwada, District Sirohi.

¶8

Duda Ram Son Of Bhuka Ji, By Caste Purohit, Resident Of Village Bhermandwada, District Sirohi.

¶9

----Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State Of Rajasthan

¶12

Dinesh Kumar Son Of Shri Suta Ram Ji, By Caste Purohit, Resident Of Nun Village, Tehsil And District Sirohi.

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. JVS Deora For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi PP Mr. Surendra Bagmalani

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

¶16

Order

¶17

27/05/2019

¶18

The matter comes up on application for early hearing of the misc. petition.

¶19

For the reason stated in the application, the application is allowed.

¶20

The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.c. has been filed by the petitioners for seeking permission for compromise in Criminal Regular Case No.856/2014 for offence under Sections 384 and 385 of IPC.

¶21

Counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter has already been compromised between the parties and it is borne out

¶22

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-163/2018]

¶23

from the compromise that respondents No.2 not inclined to proceed further in the matter. Counsel has placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. In these circumstances, the criminal proceedings against the respondents No.2 against the petitioners in offence under Sections 384, 385 of IPC may be quashed.

¶24

Counsel for the respondents No.2 complainants concurs the fact of compromise and submits that in view of the compromise, the respondents No.2 does not want to proceed further in the matter.

¶25

In this regard, a compromise deed has been submitted by the parties and the same is hereby taken on record.

¶26

In view of compromise arrived at between the parties and applying the ratio in decision of Gian Singh (Supra) , I deem it just and proper to invoke inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶27

Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed and the criminal proceedings in Criminal Regular Case No.856/2014 for offence under Sections 384 and 385 of IPC against the petitioners is hereby quashed on the basis of compromise deed.

¶28

Stay petition also disposed of accordingly.

¶29

(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J

¶30

274-Anshul/-

Narsa Ram and Ors. v. the State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narsa Ram and Ors. v. the State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhikha Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Jai Singh @ Virendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishal Singh Vs State

Abhishek Vs State of Rajasthan

Sheetal Kumar Vs Karishma Jain

Sikandar Khan Vs State of Rajasthan