Allowed

Vinay Joshi S/O Late Shri Ramavatar Joshi v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Oct 2024CRLMP/3468/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Section 482 CrPC petition sought quashing of FIR 325/2020 (offences under Sections 420, 406, 120B IPC) following an inter-se private compromise between the parties. Relying on Gian Singh and Ramgopal, the court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR with all consequential proceedings.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vinay Joshi S/O Late Shri Ramavatar Joshi Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:43184]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3468/2022

¶4

Vinay Joshi S/o Late Shri Ramavatar Joshi, Aged About 48 Years, Director Of M/s Vinkas Estates Private Limited, Resident Of 150-B, Bhagirath Marg, Vijaybari, Path No. 7, Sikar Road, Jaipur.

¶5

Vikas Joshi S/o Late Shri Ramavatar Joshi, Aged About 45 Years, Director Of M/s Vinkas Estates Private Limited, Resident Of 150-B, Bhagirath Marg, Vijaybari, Path No. 7, Sikar Road, Jaipur.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶9

Ajay Arya S/o Late Shri Rghunath Prasad Arya, Aged About 61 Years, Director Of M/s Raghuraj Buildhome Private Limited, Resident Of B-123, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Ashutosh Bhatia Mr. Rahul Verma Mr. Karan Sehgal
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Rajneesh Gupta Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP
	Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶13

Order

¶14

10/10/2024

¶15

This petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is filed, with a prayer to quash the FIR No. 325/2020 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur for offences under Sections 420, 406 and 120B of IPC, on the basis of compromise effectuated between the parties herein, in respect of their inter-se dispute.

¶16

In the instant matter learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in spite of filing of compromise before the

[2024:RJ-JP:43184]

[CRLMP-3468/2022]

(2 of 3)

Investigating Authority, charge-sheet has been filed under sections 420, 120B of IPC. It is further submitted that cognizance has been taken. Further it is submitted that despite the fact that the parties have amicably decided to put a quietus to the inter-se dispute, the said proceedings are initiated.

¶21

Both the parties have marked presence (identified by their respective counsel) and have affirmed the abovesaid contentions. 3. Learned counsel for both the parties have submitted that the dispute at hand is inter-se private in nature, which has been resolved by the parties amicably.

¶22

Heard and considered. 5. At the outset, this Court deems it appropriate to place reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in [2022 (14) SCC 531], relevant portion of which is reproduced below:

¶23

“12. The High Court, therefore, having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are noncompoundable.”

¶24

In view of the position of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in aforementioned case, and considering the personal nature of dispute, which has been amicably settled between parties, this Court deems it just and proper to allow the present misc. petition. Compromise is taken on record.

¶25

Considering the aforementioned, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the FIR No. 325/2020 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur with all consequential proceedings, are hereby quashed and set aside.

[2024:RJ-JP:43184]

[CRLMP-3468/2022]

(3 of 3)