Rajasthan High Court
Mohammad Danish Iqbal S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 April, 2021
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3714/2019
1. Mohammad Danish Iqbal S/o Shri Jasimuddin, R/o Village
Bandi, Police Station Neemchak, District Gaya, Bihar, At
Present R/o Plot No.5A, Shivaji Nagar, Jhotwara, Jaipur,
Raj.
2. Modassar Ali S/o Shri Jasimuddin, R/o Village Bandi,
Police Station Neemchak, District Gaya, Bihar, At Present
R/o Plot No.5A, Shivaji Nagar, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Raj.
3. Tauhid Akhtar S/o Mohammad Mukhtyar, R/o Village
Parsa, Ps Purushottampur, District West Champaran,
Bihar.
4. Tauseef Ahamad S/o Tokir Ahamad, R/o Nawab Palace,
Police Station Tadarpur, District Bhagalpur, Bihar.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP.
2. Sohan Singh Chauhan S/o Shri N.s. Chauhanm, R/o G-
144, G Block, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer, Raj., The Then
Assistant General Manager, U.co. Bank, Head Office 3 And
4, D.d. Block, Salt Lake, Kolkata (West Bengal).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kamal Kumar Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
08/04/2021
1. Instant criminal Miscellaneous petition has been filed under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceedings pending before
the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.12, Jaipur,
Metropolitan (Raj.), in Criminal Case No.1136/2015 titled as State
of Rajasthan Vs. Mohd. Danish & Ors.
2. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that the parties
have entered into a compromise. Counsel further submits that in
view of the compromise, the parties filed an application before the
(2 of 2) [CRLMP-3714/2019]
trial court for compounding the offences under Sections 66, 66-C,
66-D of IT Act and 120-B of IPC, which was partly allowed by the
learned trial court compounding the offences under Sections 66,
66-C, 66-D of IT Act vide order dated 10.01.2019 and now the
offence under Section 120-B of IPC remains against the petitioner.
Counsel further submits that the statement of complainant (PW-1)
has been recorded by the learned trial court in which he has
stated that he has received the money and also settled the dispute
by way of compromise. Counsel relied upon the judgment passed
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Gian Singh Vs.
State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2012(10) SCC 303.
3. Despite service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the
complainant.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.
5. I have perused the record and also the order dated
10.01.2019 passed by the learned trial court. Considering the
facts and circumstances of the present case and the fact that the
parties have settled their dispute by way of compromise and also
considering the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the matter of Gian Singh (supra), the criminal misc. petition is
allowed and the proceedings pending before the Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate No.12, Jaipur, Metropolitan (Raj.) in
criminal case No 1136/2015 titled as State of Rajasthan Vs. Mohd.
Danish & Ors are hereby quashed.
6. The stay application also stands disposed of.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
CHARU SONI /594
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
