Allowed

Antar Lal S/O Sh. Sita Ram, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 Feb 2024CRLMP/7518/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashes criminal proceedings in FIR No.84/2023 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court accepted that parties settled a dispute regarding a disputed marriage, and both the complainant and victim discontinued prosecution. The court held that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process and granted quashing.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.84/2023 registered at Police Station Sadar Gangapurcity are quashed and set aside.

Antar Lal S/O Sh. Sita Ram, Vs State of Rajasthan — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:6358]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7518/2023

¶4

Antar Lal S/o Sh. Sita Ram, Resident Of Tendu, Police Station Mantown, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan

¶5

Naresh S/o Sh. Sita Ram, Resident Of Tendu, Police Station Mantown, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan

¶6

Sita Ram S/o Sh. Hajari, Resident Of Tendu, Police Station Mantown, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan

¶7

Bharosi S/o Sh. Prabhu, Resident Of Bhadeda, Police Station Mantown, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan

¶8

Manju W/o Sh. Satyanarayan Gurjar, Resident Of Aalanpur, Police Station Kotwali, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan

¶9

Jal Singh S/o Sh. Radheyshyam Gurjar, Resident Of Badmilakpur, Police Station Sadar, Gangapur City, Rajasthan

¶10

----Petitioners

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶13

Ravindra Singh Gurjar S/o Sh. Hajari Lal, Resident Of Badmilakpur, Police Station Sadar, Gangapur City, Rajasthan

¶14

Mahendra Singh Gurjar S/o Sh. Hajari Lal, Resident Of Badmilakpur, Police Station Sadar, Gangapur City, Rajasthan

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, PP Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order

¶18

07/02/2024

¶19

By way of this misc. petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, a prayer has been made to quash the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.84/2023 registered at Police Station Sadar Gangapurcity for offences u/s 365, 364A, 368 & 120-B of IPC, on the basis of compromise arrived at between parties.

¶20

The impugned FIR came to be registered by non-petitioner No.2-complainant in respect of kidnapping of non-petitioner No.3-

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JP:6358]

[CRLMP-7518/2023]

victim-Mahendra Singh Gurjar by petitioners. Counsel for both parties submits that underlaying dispute was in respect of nata marriage of one lady with non-petitioner No.3, who happens to be ex wife of petitioner No.1-Antar Lal. Now, with the indulgence of panch and members of society, dispute between parties has settled and thereafter the complainant so also the victim do not want to pursue the prosecution of petitioners in the impugned FIR. 3. Both parties have placed on record the certified copy of compromise dated 30.10.2023, which was placed on record before the trial Court and jointly submits that in view of mutual settlement arrived at between parties, criminal proceedings of present impugned FIR may be quashed and set aside. 4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab[(2012) 10 SCC 303] observed as follows:

¶25

“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.”

¶26

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in another case of Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh [2022 (14) SCC 531 observed as follows:

[2024:RJ-JP:6358]

[CRLMP-7518/2023]

(3 of 3)

“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.”

¶31

In view of legal proposition of law laid down by the Apex Court in aforesaid cases, and having considered the nature of accusation and the dispute between parties as enumerated hereinabove, which has been allegedly to be mutually settled, in the opinion of this Court, the continuation of criminal proceedings on the impugned FIR would be sheer misuse of the process of law and yield no positive reliance. When the complainant-victim both do not support the prosecution case, and are not willing to continue criminal proceedings, in the light of judgments referred hereinabove and considering the underlaying dispute due to which the nature of offence may not be treated as of serious nature, therefore, this Court deems it just and proper to quash criminal proceedings arising out of impugned FIR, in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process of law.

¶32

As a final result, present criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.84/2023 registered at Police Station Sadar Gangapurcity is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶33

All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

¶34

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶35

RONAK/601

Antar Lal S/O Sh. Sita Ram, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antar Lal S/O Sh. Sita Ram, 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

Ritu D/O Shri Ajay Kumar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijay Bai Meena Daughter of Batturam Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhup Singh Son of Sh. Vikram, Vs State of Rajasthan

Bharat Choudhary @ Bhola S/O Goverdhan Choudhary Vs the State of Rajasthan

Khemchand Son of Shri Kantiram Jatav, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramsingh S/O Shri Sadhuram @ Sandhya Vs the State of Rajasthan