Allowed

Saddam v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC22 Aug 2022CRLMP/2498/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur allowed criminal miscellaneous petitions and quashed FIR No.128/2021 for offences under Sections 452, 323/34 IPC. The court relied on a Supreme Court decision in Gian Singh case, invoking inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. due to a verified compromise between parties.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.128/2021 and entire subsequent proceedings for the offence under Sections 452, 323/34 IPC are quashed.

Saddam Vs State of Rajasthan — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2498/2021

¶4

Saddam S/o Kamaru Khan, Aged About 20 Years, Ambedkar Colony, Pipar City, Dist. Jodhpur.

¶5

Fajru Khan S/o Hakim Khan, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Khiyanio Ki Dhani, Sindhipura, Tehsil Pipar, Dist. Jodhpur.

¶6

Pathan Khan S/o Fajru Khan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Khiyanio Ki Dhani, Sindhipura, Tehsil Pipar, Dist. Jodhpur.

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶10

Raseeda @ Paramjeet W/o Abdul Rahman, Bhakri Ki Dhani, Sindhipura, Tehsil Pipar, Dist. Jodhpur.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

Connected With

¶13

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2825/2021

¶14

Jamal Khan S/o Aalam Khan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Khiyanio Ki Dhani, Sindhipura, Tehsil Pipar, District Jodhpur.

¶15

----Petitioner

¶16

Versus

¶17

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶18

Raseeda @ Paramjeet W/o Abdul Rahman, R/o Bhakri Ki Dhani, Sindhipura, Tehsil Pipar ,district Jodhpur.

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed Hussain For Respondent(s) : Mr. SS Rajpurohit, PP Mr. Kishan Meghwal & Mr. Kailash Kumar

¶21

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶22

Order

¶23

22/08/2022

¶24

Counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the complainant submit that the petitioners and the complainant have

¶25

(2 of 2)

¶26

[CRLMP-2498/2021]

¶27

entered into a compromise in the ongoing criminal proceedings. It is thus submitted that the parties are not inclined to proceed further in the matter.

¶28

Counsel for the parties have placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in case of Gian Singh V/s. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303] .

¶29

Learned Public Prosecutor states that the compromise has happened between the parties and the factum of such compromise stands verified from the Notary Public, Jodhpur City.

¶30

In view of compromise arrived at between the parties and applying the ratio in decision of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (supra) , this Court deems it just and proper to invoke its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶31

Accordingly, the present misc. petitions are allowed and the FIR No.128/2021 lodged at Police Station Pipar City, District Jodhpur Rural for the offence under Sections 452, 323/34 IPC, along with entire proceedings pursuant thereto qua the petitioners is hereby quashed.

¶32

Stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶33

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶34

131-132 Sanjay/-

Saddam v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saddam v. State of Rajasthan

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

Bhura Lal Vs State

Murlidhar Vs State

Satish Patel Vs State of Rajasthan

Ruchika Solanki Vs State of Rajasthan

Ranu Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Keshar Mal and Ors. Vs State and Anr.