This High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking to quash an FIR for assault and grievous hurt offences on the grounds of a settled, personal dispute between parties via a written compromise, citing Supreme Court precedents.
FIR No.82/2023 and all consequential proceedings are quashed and set aside.
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.
[2024:RJ-JP:6206]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 59/2024
----Accused-Petitioners
Versus
….Respondent
----Complainant-Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Santosh Kumar Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP Mr. Jagdish Singh Chouhan
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order
06/02/2024
[2024:RJ-JP:6206]
[CRLMP-59/2024]
(2 of 3)
“Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between an offender and victim is not the same thing as compounding of offence. They are different and not interchangeable. Strictly speaking, the power of compounding of offences given to a court under Section 320 is materially different from the quashing of criminal proceedings by the High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. In compounding of offences, power of a criminal court is circumscribed by the provisions contained in Section 320 and the court is guided solely and squarely thereby while, on the other hand, the formation of opinion by the High Court for quashing a criminal offence or criminal proceeding or criminal complaint is guided by the material on record as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power although the ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment.”
(3 of 3)
[2024:RJ-JP:6206]
[CRLMP-59/2024]
(SUDESH BANSAL), J
RONAK/110
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. based on a personal compromise between parties involving non-compoundable offences.
Whether the ends of justice justify the quashing of FIR numbers despite the offences being of a nature that is generally non-compoundable.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh Vs. State of PunjabExplained¶24
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] · Who else cites this
Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya PradeshExplained¶26
Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh [2022 (14) SCC 531] · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nand Lal
Nand Banwar
Pappu @ Ramavtar
Banwar Lal
State Of Rajasthan
Hari Narayan
Sudes h Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
