The petitioner challenged proceedings under various IPC and SC/ST Act charges. The court relied on a compromise and the Gian Singh Supreme Court decision to invoke inherent powers and discharge petitioners.
Petition allowed; petitioners discharged from offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 354, 336 of IPC and Section 3(1)(X) & 3(1)(Xi) of SC/ST Act.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 499/2021
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : | Mr. Vikram Singh |
|---|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : | Mr. Farzand Ali, GA cum AAG, a/w Mr. Vikram Sharma, PP |
| Mr. Umaid Singh, for the complainant |
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
21/01/2021
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-499/2021]
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
352-Sudheer/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash proceedings for non-compoundable offences under caste-atrocities laws in view of a compromise and Supreme Court ratio.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh V/s. State of Punjab & Anr.Relied on¶3
Gian Singh V/s. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303] · Who else cites this
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.Applied¶5
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (supra)
3 provisions across 3 enactments
SURENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
