Allowed

Smt Brijesh Mittal W/O Late Sh. Jang Bahadur, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC11 Sept 2024CRLMP/5898/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Complainant sought quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 453, 380 and 384 IPC after parties settled their dispute by compromise; the trial court had declined to attest the compromise. Relying on Gian Singh and Narinder Singh, the court quashed the FIR and proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Trial court order dated 28.08.2024 modified; FIR No.155/2022 and all criminal proceedings arising from it quashed and set aside.

Smt Brijesh Mittal W/O Late Sh. Jang Bahadur, Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:38729]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5898/2024

¶4

Smt Brijesh Mittal W/o Late Sh. Jang Bahadur, Aged About 80 Years, Resident Of Nk-14, 3Rd Floor, Old Dabal Story, Khatushyma Chok, Nirmalpuri, Lajpat Nagar-4, New Delhi.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶8

Mohd. Ishaq Qureshi S/o Sh. Jamil Ahmed Quereshi, Resident Of Jaisinghpura Khor, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Presently Resident Of Shubash Chowk, Pano Ka Dariba, Bakshi Chand Ki Gali, Plot No. 649, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Complainant(s)	: Mr. Vikas Kabra, Adv.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, Addl. GA
For Accused	: Mr. Yatharth Agarwal, Adv.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order

¶12

11/09/2024

¶13

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner-complainant (for short ‘the complainant’) under Section 155/2022 for quashing and setting aside the entire criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.155/2022 registered at Police Station Jai Singhpura Khor, Jaipur City (North) for the offence punishable under Sections 453, 380 and 384 IPC.

¶14

Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that after registration of the impugned FIR, both the parties have entered into a compromise. The original compromise deed executed between the parties has been placed on record as Annexure-2 which has been duly signed by both the parties. He further submits that a compromise application was filed before the trial

[2024:RJ-JP:38729]

[CRLMP-5898/2024]

(2 of 2)

court but the trial court vide its order dated 28.08.2024 denied to attest the compromise, yet in her statement recorded as PW-1 the complainant-Smt Brijesh Mittal stated that she does not want to proceed further in the impugned FIR and ultimately she was declared hostile. Hence, the impugned FIR as also the criminal proceedings arising out of said FIR be quashed and the order dated 28.08.2024 passed by the trial court be modified accordingly.

¶19

Learned counsel for the accused does not dispute the factum of compromise between the parties.

¶20

Learned Addl. GA has opposed the arguments.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

¶22

A perusal of the material on record shows that the dispute between the complainant and accused has amicably been settled by them. In view of compromise and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court of India in cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 , this Court deems it just and proper to quash the FIR in question and the proceedings arising therefrom.

¶23

Resultantly, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. The order dated 28.08.2024 passed by the trial court is modified and the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.155/2022 registered at Police Station Jai Singhpura Khor, Jaipur City (North) as also the impugned FIR are hereby quashed and set aside.

¶24

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

¶25

Jatin /34

Smt Brijesh Mittal W/O Late Sh. Jang Bahadur, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Brijesh Mittal W/O Late Sh. Jang Bahadur, 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

Suman D/O Anil Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Krishna Kumari D/O Samay Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Garima Choudhary W/O Shri Harish Jat, Vs State of Rajasthan

Sajna Devi W/O Subedar Singh Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Devkishan S/O Rambharoh Vs State of Rajasthan

Ishwari Prasad Vs State of Raj and Anr.