Allowed

Harinarayan Choudhary S/O Shri Laxmi Narayan Choudhary, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 Feb 2024CRLMP/924/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 482 CrPC sought quashing of an FIR for extortion, cheating and criminal conspiracy offences after a compromise with the complainant during investigation. The Court, applying Supreme Court precedent on quashing upon settlement, allowed the petition and quashed the FIR along with consequential proceedings.

What the court decided

AI extract

Harinarayan Choudhary S/O Shri Laxmi Narayan Choudhary… — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:9416]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 924/2024

¶4

Harinarayan Choudhary S/o Shri Laxmi Narayan Choudhary, R/o Piploda Ki Dhani, Bindayaka, Jaipur (West)

¶5

Anil Verma S/o Babu Lal, R/o Piploda Ki Dhani, Bindayaka, Jaipur (West)

¶6

Krishan Kumar S/o Bhuraram, R/o Piploda Ki Dhani, Bindayaka, Jaipur (West)

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶10

Bhanwar Lal S/o Choturam, R/o Nadi Wali Dhani, Hathoj, Kalwar, Jaipur (West)

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Purshottam Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.K. Sheoran, PP Mr. Poonam Chand Sharma for Complainant

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

¶14

Order

¶15

23/02/2024

¶16

Parties are present in person and have duly been identified by their respective counsel.

¶17

By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused-petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR No.164/2023 registered at Police Station Bindayaka, District Jaipur City (West) for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 389, 420, 406 and 120B of IPC along with all subsequent proceedings arising out of it.

[2024:RJ-JP:9416]

[CRLMP-924/2024]

(2 of 2)

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during pendency of investigation, the petitioners have entered into a compromise with the complainant. The written compromise has been annexed with this petition.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant do not dispute the factum of compromise.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties; material made available for my perusal; considering that the parties have resolved their dispute and also finding that the present case is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr-reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. [ AIR 1992 SC 604 ], the aforesaid FIR is liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶24

In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and FIR No.164/2023 registered at Police Station Bindayaka, District Jaipur City (West) along with consequential proceedings arising out of it is quashed and set aside. Consequence to follow.

¶25

Stay application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶26

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

¶27

GAUTAM JAIN /65

Harinarayan Choudhary S/O Shri Laxmi Narayan Choudhary, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Harinarayan Choudhary S/O Shri Laxmi Narayan Choudhary, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish S/O Prakash, Vs State of Rajasthan

Shambhu Singh S/O Inder Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjay @ Sanju Son of Shri Mohan Nath @ Gorakhnath Vs State of Rajasthan

Yogesh @ Pintu S/O Shri Ramesh Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjay Sharma S/O Shri Santosh Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Gordhan Singh S/O Shri Mukat Bihari Vs the State of Rajasthan