Allowed

Ahsan @ Majanu S/O Babu Khan, v. State of Rajastahn

Rajasthan HC18 Sept 2024CRLMP/6092/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners sought quashing of proceedings under Section 528 BNSS following a compromise. While the trial court allowed compounding for some offences, it refused for others held non-compoundable. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the High Court modified the trial court's order and quashed the entire proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of entire proceedings in Sessions Case No.60/2015 and modification of the trial court's order dated 07.08.2024.

Ahsan @ Majanu S/O Babu Khan, Vs State of Rajastahn — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:39353]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6092/2024

¶4

Ahsan @ Majanu S/o Babu Khan, Resident Of Rajeev Colony, Gangapur City, Rajasthan.

¶5

Akram @ Ladla S/o Babu Khan, Resident Of Rajeev Colony, Gangapur City, Rajasthan.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajastahn, Through P.p.

¶9

Ali Mohammad S/o Ramjan, R/o Chuligate, Near Teli Wali Masjid, Gangapur City, P.s. Gangapur City.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Ravindra Kumar Paliwal, Adv.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, Addl. GA
For Complainant(s)	: Mr. Manish Kumar Sharma, Adv.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order

¶13

18/09/2024

¶14

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 528 BNSS for quashing and setting aside the entire proceedings in Sessions Case No.60/2015 (State Vs. Ahsan & Ors.) pending before Additional District & Sessions Judge No.1, Gangapur City arising out of FIR No.269/2015 registered at Police Station Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the complainant submitted that a compromise has been arrived between the parties and they have settled their dispute. Both the parties submitted a compromise application before the trial court but the trial court vide its order dated 07.06.2024 attested the compromise for the offence under

[2024:RJ-JP:39353]

[CRLMP-6092/2024]

(2 of 2)

Sections 341, 323, 325 IPC only and vide order dated 07.08.2024 denied to attest the compromise for the offence under Sections 324, 308 IPC being non-compoundable. He has prayed that on account of compromise, the order dated 07.08.2024 passed by the trial court be modified and the petition be allowed.

¶20

The parties are present in the Court today and their signatures have been obtained on the court’s order sheet. They have been duly identified by their respective Advocates.

¶21

Learned Addl. GA has opposed the arguments.

¶22

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

¶23

A perusal of the material on record shows that the dispute between the petitioners and complainant 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.

¶24

Resultantly, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. The order dated 07.08.2024 passed by the trial court is modified and entire proceedings in Sessions Case No.60/2015 (State Vs. Ahsan & Ors.) pending before Additional District & Sessions Judge No.1, Gangapur City arising out of FIR No.269/2015 registered at Police Station Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur are set aside.

¶25

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

¶26

Tahir/59

Ahsan @ Majanu S/O Babu Khan, v. State of Rajastahn

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahsan @ Majanu S/O Babu Khan, v. State of Rajastahn

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

Bhairulal S/O Shri Motilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Divyanshu Samariya S/O Shri Anil Samariya, Vs State of Rajasthan

Kuldeep Shamra Son of Sh. Shyam Sundar Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikram @ Vikki S/O Shankar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Naina Chandwani Wife of Harish Chandwani, Vs Bharti Bhargava Wife of Satish Kumar Bhargava

Lalita Devi W/O Mukut Murari Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan