Allowed

Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC11 Jan 2023CRLMP/191/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the common miscellaneous petition and quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings. The decision was based on a verified compromise between the parties and the application of the ratio in Gian Singh V/s. State of Punjab.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous petition was allowed; FIR No. 0147/2022 and all entire proceedings thereunder were quashed and set aside, and all pending applications were disposed of.

Ramlal Vs State of Rajasthan — Caste Atrocities | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

(1 of 3)

¶2

[CRLMP-191/2023]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 191/2023

¶5

Ramlal S/o Sh. Baldas Swami, Aged About 71 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶6

Manphool Das S/o Sh. Baldas Swami, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶7

Shankar Das S/o Sh. Baldas Swami, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶8

Devi Lal S/o Sh. Ram Lal Swami, Aged About 46 Years, R/ o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶9

Net Ram S/o Sh. Nanakdas Swami, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶10

Nathu Ram S/o Sh. Jainarayan Swami, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶11

Daya Ram S/o Sh. Jagdish Swami, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶12

Mahaveer S/o Sh. Jagdish Swami, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶13

Akshaydas Swami S/o Sh. Unknown, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶14

Raja Ram S/o Sh. Shankar Das Swami, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶15

Prakash S/o Sh. Daya Ram Swami, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶16

Radhyshyam S/o Sh. Baldas Swami, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶17

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-191/2023]

¶18

Bajrang Das S/o Sh. Baldas Swami, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶19

Mangilal S/o Sh. Manphool Das, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶20

Subhash S/o Sh. Manphool Das, Aged About 30 Years, R/ o Village Bachhrara, Rajiyasar, Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India.

¶21

----Petitioners

¶22

Versus

¶23

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp 2. Mohini Devi W/o Late Sh. Asharam, Aged About 58 Years, B/c Nayak, R/o Village Bachhrara, Deidaspura, Ganganagar.

¶24

----Respondents

¶25

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Sunil Joshi
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. SK Bhati, PP
	Mr. Pravin Vyas

¶26

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶27

Order

¶28

11/01/2023

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has jointly submitted that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. It is borne out from the compromise that complainant is not inclined to proceed further in the matter.

¶30

Learned counsel for the parties have placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in case of Gian Singh V/s. State of

¶31

Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303] .

¶32

It is also submitted that the aforementioned compromise has been placed by the respective parties before the Deputy Registrar

¶33

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-191/2023]

¶34

(Judicial) of this Court for verification thereof, in pursuance of the order of this Court passed on 10.01.2023. The said compromise has been verified by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court on 10.01.2023 itself.

¶35

In view of compromise arrived at between the parties, which has been verified by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court 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.

¶36

Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed and FIR No. 0147/2022 registered at Police Station Rajiyasar, District Sriganganagar for the offence under Sections 447, 341, 323, 354, 379, 143, (B) of IPC and Sections 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r), (3)(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 along with the entire proceeding pursuant thereto, qua the present petitioners are hereby quashed and set aside. All pending applications stand disposed of.

¶37

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶38

C-1-Jitender

Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramlal 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

Rajkumar Khatik Vs State of Rajasthan

Asha Ram Ashumal Vs State and Anr.

Man Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Satish Vs State of Rajasthan

Jugal Kishore Swami Vs State of Rajasthan

Parma Devi Vs State of Rajasthan