Allowed

Rajmohan S/O Shri Moharpal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Dec 2024CRLMP/8078/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This miscellaneous petition sought to quash pending criminal proceedings based on a compromise between the petitioners and the complainant. The High Court invoked powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., relying on Supreme Court precedents, and deemed it just to quash the entire trial.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners in case No.4/2017 before learned Judicial Magistrate Sapotra District Karauli were quashed and set aside.

Rajmohan S/O Shri Moharpal Vs State of Rajasthan — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:49760]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8078/2024

¶4

Rajmohan S/o Shri Moharpal, R/o Tipua, Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶5

Munesh S/o Shri Mularam, R/o Doondipura, Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶6

Shivraj S/o Shri Thandi, R/o Doondipura, Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶10

Smt. Rupanti W/o Shri Hansa Meena, R/o Sindhupura (Kanapura), Police Station Sapotra, District Karauli (Raj.)

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Rahul Sharma for Mr. Rajneesh Gutpa Ms. Chanchal
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, Dy.G.A Mr. Mukesh Kumar Goyal for
		Mr. Chandra Shekhar (for complainant)

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶14

Order

¶15

03/12/2024

¶16

This Miscellaneous petition under Section 528 of B.N.N.S, 2023 has been filed to quash and set aside the entire pending proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate Sapotra, District Karauli in criminal case No.4/2017 titled as State Vs. Shivraj & Ors. in view of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶17

The brief facts are that an FIR No.30/2015 was filed by Complainant/Respondent No.2- Rupanti at Police Station Sapotra

[2024:RJ-JP:49760]

[CRLMP-8078/2024]

(2 of 3)

District Karauli. After investigation charge-sheet against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 193 and 201 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC was filed. Charges were framed against the petitioners and trial was commenced. During the trial petitioners and complainant-Rupanti arrived at a compromise and an application was filed before learned Judicial Magistrate Sapotra, District Karauli to attest the compromise for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 193 and 201 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC. Learned trial Court duly attested the compromise for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC because the same is compoundable but decline to attest the compromise for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC as the offences being non-compoundable.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the statement of the complainant-Rupanti has also been recorded before the trial Court during trial as PW-6 in which she has turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution version. He further submits that as the parties have settled their dispute amicably on the basis of compromise, therefore, there will be no purpose for continuing the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. 4. Learned counsel for the parties have placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Ors . reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688 and submits that the proceedings pending before learned Judicial Magistrate be set aside and quashed in the interest of justice.

[2024:RJ-JP:49760]

[CRLMP-8078/2024]

(3 of 3)

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant accepts the factum of compromise between the parties and submits that the proceedings pending before the trial Court be quashed. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties are in agreement that the dispute between the parties have been amicably settled. Therefore, the complainant does not want to pursue the matter.

¶27

In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties as well as order of learned trial Court dated 15.07.2024 and applying the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C and the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶28

Accordingly, this criminal petition is allowed and criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners in criminal case No.4/2017 before learned Judicial Magistrate Sapotra District Karauli be quashed and set aside. Consequences to follow.

¶29

Stay application also stands disposed of.

¶30

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶31

TANISHA /31

Rajmohan S/O Shri Moharpal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajmohan S/O Shri Moharpal 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

Ghisa Ram Vs State

Rakesh Kumar Vs State

Madan @ Madniya S/O Shri Modiya Vs the State of Rajasthan

Dharasingh S/O Brajlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Rakesh S/O Shree Chajuram Meena, Vs State of Rajasthan

Veer Singh S/O Lal Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan