Allowed

Sabir Hussain Ansari Son of Shri Abdul Latif Ansari, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC30 May 2024CRLMP/520/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR for cheating and forgery offences. The Court relied on settled Supreme Court precedents and the fact that the dispute regarding a partnership firm was amicably resolved by compromise between the parties.

What did the court decide?

The FIR No.0002/2024 registered at Police Station Borkheda is quashed and set aside. The I.A. No.1/2024 as well as stay application stand disposed of.

Sabir Hussain Ansari Son of Shri Abdul… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:26018]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 520/2024

¶4

Sabir Hussain Ansari Son Of Shri Abdul Latif Ansari, Resident Of 670, Purana Motor Stand, Shripura, Subhash Chowk, Kota, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

¶8

Sunil Kumar Saini Son Of Shri Bhanwarlal Saini, Resident Of House No. 165, Nayagaov, Police Line Kota, Rajasthan.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nitin Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahendra Meena, PP Mr. Samarth Sharma, for complainant

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶12

Order

¶13

30/05/2024

¶14

Petitioner and complainant are present in person and they have duly been identified by their respective counsel.

¶15

Matter comes upon application (I.A. No.1/2024) for quashing of FIR No.0002/2024 mainly on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. A copy of original compromise has been annexed with this petition.

¶16

By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused-petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR No.0002/2024 registered at Police Station Borkheda, District Kota City for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of IPC.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of the investigation, the petitioner has entered into a

[2024:RJ-JP:26018]

[CRLMP-520/2024]

(2 of 2)

compromise with the complainant and have resolved their dispute amicably which is evident from the compromise annexed with the application. From bare perusal of the FIR, it appears that there is dispute between the parties with regard to partnership firm which is of personal nature.

¶22

Complainant is present in person. Under his instructions, learned counsel submits that parties have resolved their dispute amicably and he has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties; the material made available for my perusal; considering that the parties have resolved their dispute amicably and also finding that the present case is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr-reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. [ AIR 1992 SC 604 ], the aforesaid FIR is liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties. 7. In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No.0002/2024 registered at Police Station Borkheda, District Kota City is quashed and set aside. Consequence to follow. 8. The application (I.A. No.1/2024) as well as stay application also stand disposed of.

¶24

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN), J

¶25

CHARU SONI /421

Sabir Hussain Ansari Son of Shri Abdul Latif Ansari, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sabir Hussain Ansari Son of Shri Abdul Latif Ansari, 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

Smt. Saroj Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramcharan Son of Shri Thandi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinod Kumar S/O Shri Babulal Agarwal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Prashant Jat Son of Late Shri Ramsahai Jat, Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Kumar Gaud Son of Durgashankar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Man Mohan Bansal S/O Late Shri Hari Narayan Ji Bansal Vs State of Rajasthan