Allowed

Daulat Ram v. State

Rajasthan HC18 Aug 2022CRLMP/2345/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed FIR No. 290/2020 registering offences under Sections 420 and 406 IPC. The court allowed the petition based on a verified compromise executed between the petitioners and the complainant, citing the principles laid down in Jian Singh and Bhajan Lal cases to establish harmony.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 290/2020, P.S. Pratapgarh is quashed and the stay application is disposed of.

Daulat Ram Vs State — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2345/2020

¶4

Daulat Ram S/o Shri Jodha, Aged About 75 Years, Kanod, District Udaipur.

¶5

Shankar S/o Daulat Ram, Aged About 40 Years, Kanod, District Udaipur.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State, Through P.p.

¶9

Narendra Tatkar Dholi S/o Shri Madan Lal, Kanod, District Udaipur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lokesh Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mohd. Javed Gouri, PP Mr. Sanjay Raj Pandit

¶12

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶13

Order

¶14

18/08/2022

¶15

By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have sought quashment of FIR No.290/2020, P.S. Pratapgarh, registered against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that during the pendency of investigation, the petitioners and complainant have entered into compromise, which after being reduced in writing, has been placed before the Investigating Officer, who has verified the same.

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLMP-4535/2022]

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor, on the basis of factual report dated 16.08.2022, accepted the factum of compromise having been executed without any fear or coercion.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the complainant, while accepting the factum of compromise, submitted that the dispute between the petitioner and complainant has been resolved.

¶21

In view of the aforesaid and considering that the petitioner and complainant have entered into compromise, in order to establish harmony and peace, and being guided 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 ] , this Court deems it appropriate to quash the FIR in question.

¶22

In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No.290/2020, registered at P.S. Pratapgarh is quashed. Consequence to follow.

¶23

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶24

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶25

283-skm/-

Daulat Ram v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daulat Ram v. State

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

Bharat Meghwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Yash Pal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramesh Vaishnav Vs State of Rajasthan

Shanti Lal Sankhala Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwati Vs State of Rajasthan