The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under IPC Sections 392/34 and 411 upon petitioners showing they had amicably settled the dispute with the complainant, relying on settled principles allowing quashing despite the non-compoundable nature of IPC Section 411.
The criminal proceedings in Case No.160/2016 and the stay application were quashed and set aside.
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. 1013/2022
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hanwant Singh Balot For Respondent(s) : Mr. Andaram Choudhary, P. P. Mr. Pravin Vyas
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
21/03/2022
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-1013/2022]
compromise and amicably settled their dispute and now no dispute remains between them.
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-1013/2022]
compromise arrived at between the parties although the offence under Section 411 IPC is not compoundable.
(DINESH MEHTA),J
88-A.Arora/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC when the offence under IPC Section 411 is non-compoundable but parties have settled the dispute.
Whether the applicability of compoundable offences under IPC Sections 392/34 permits quashing of proceedings involving a non-compoundable offence under IPC Section 411 upon settlement.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & AnrRelied on¶20
2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934
State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors.Relied on¶20
AIR 1992 SC 604 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Anop Singh
Pratap Singh
Madan Singh
Ashok Jain
State Of Rajasthan
DINESH MEHTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
