High Court quashed an FIR under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. on compromise between parties in a private dispute. Proceeds were deemed an abuse of process after offences were compounded.
Quashed the impugned FIR No.34/2018 and all subsequent proceedings arising from it.
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
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.6027/2022
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Surendra Singh Shekahwat, Adv. |
|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Prashant Sharma, PP Ms. Ruchi Sharma, Adv. |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
Order
12/10/2022
This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No.34/2018 registered with Police Station Thoi, Khandela, District Sikar for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 453 and 120-B of IPC.
Prayer for quashing is on the ground that the parties have entered into compromise.
Respondent No.2 is physically present in Court and submits that parties have entered into compromise. The dispute is of private nature.
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-6027/2022]
After compounding of the offences alleged, continuance of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law. Hence the impugned FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising out of aforesaid FIR are hereby quashed and this petition is allowed.
(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J
Ashwani/-96
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings for a private dispute where parties have compromised should be quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Suresh Singh Son Of Shri Bhim Singh
Kuldeep Singh Son Of Shri Abhay Singh Jodha
State Of Rajasthan
Vinay Agrawal Son Of Late Shri Virendra Agrawal
BIRENDRA KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
