Allowed

Pramod v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Oct 2022CRLMP/5969/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of an FIR and consequential proceedings. The High Court allowed the petition relying on the Supreme Court decision in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, holding it just and proper to quash proceedings due to the parties' compromise.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.192/2023 and all consequential proceedings for offences under IPC Sections 323, 341, 327, 382, 427, 506, 143 and Arms Act Section 27 are quashed.

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

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:32424]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5969/2023

¶4

Pramod S/o Shri Rameshwarlal, Aged About 25 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Purabsar, Tehsil Pallu, Dist. Hanumangarh(Raj.)

¶5

Sandeep S/o Shri Ramkumar, Aged About 23 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Purabsar, Tehsil Pallu, Dist. Hanumangarh(Raj.)

¶6

Sahil S/o Bhagwanaram, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Hardaswali Aathuna Bas, Thesil Rawatsar, Dist. Hanumangarh(Raj.)

¶7

Ravindra S/o Harisingh, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Bhagwansar, Thesil Nohar, Dist. Hanumangarh(Raj.)

¶8

Sonu S/o Babulal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Pallu, Tehsil Pallu, Dist. Hanumangarh(Raj.)

¶9

----Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶12

Harisingh S/o Manphool Ram, R/o Ward No. 01, Rawatsar, Tehsil Rawatsar, Dist. Hanumangarh

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Rakesh Matoria
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Shrawan Kumar, PP
	Mr. Zafar khan, for the respondent
	No.2

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

¶16

Order

¶17

03/10/2023

¶18

The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of FIR No.192/2023 registered at Police Station Pallu, District Hanumangarh, as well as all consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 323, 341, 327, 382, 427, 506 and 143 of IPC and under Section 27 of Arms Act on the basis of compromise.

[2023:RJ-JD:32424]

[CRLMP-5969/2023]

(2 of 2)

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter has already been compromised by the parties and it is borne out from the compromise that respondent No.2 is not inclined to proceed further in the matter. Learned counsel has placed reliance on a decision of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303. In these circumstances, the FIR lodged by the respondent No.2 against the petitioners may be quashed.

¶23

Learned counsel for the respondent concurs the fact of compromise and submitted that in view of the compromise, the respondent No.2 does not want to proceed further in the matter.

¶24

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

¶25

Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No.192/2023 registered at Police Station Pallu, District Hanumangarh, as well as all consequential proceedings initiated pursuant thereto for offences under Sections 323, 341, 327, 382, 427, 506 and 143 of IPC and under Section 27 of Arms Act lodged against the petitioners is hereby quashed on the basis of compromise deed qua the petitioners.

¶26

Stay petition is also decided accordingly.

¶27

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶28

466-KshamaD/-

Pramod v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod 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

Kanhiya Lal Nai Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajnesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jagdish Prasad Kangasia Vs State of Rajasthan

Sampat Singh Rathore Vs Maharana Pratap Uni. of Ag. and Tec. and Ors.

Khetram Meghwal Vs State of Rajasthan

Harbansh Singh Vs State of Rajasthan