Dhirendra Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 18450 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6189/2021

1. Dhirendra Choudhary S/o Late Shri Achlu Ram, Aged About 42 Years, R/o 12/95, Chopasani Housing Board, Dist. Jodhpur (Raj.)

2. Smt. Basanti Choudhary W/o Late Shri Achlu Ram, Aged About 64 Years, R/o 12/95, Chopasani Housing Board, Dist. Jodhpur (Raj.)

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Smt. Minashi W/o Dhirendra Choudhary S/o Late Shr Achlu Ram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o 12/95, Chopasani Housing Board, Dist. Jodhpur (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ripudaman Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit, PP Mr. Yashpal Khileri

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment

03/12/2021

1. It is stated at the Bar that a compromise has been arrived at

between the parties and it is borne out from the compromise that

the complainant is not inclined to proceed further in the matter.

The compromise deed filed is placed on record.

2. Learned counsel for the parties have placed reliance on a

decision of Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of

Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, State of M.P. V/s Laxmi

Narayan & Ors. [AIR 2019 SC 1296] & Ram Gopal and Ors.

Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 1489 and

1488 of 2012 decided on 29.09.2021).

3.   It    is   also   submitted         that      upon       the    aforementioned


                                                                        (2 of 2)                   [CRLMP-6189/2021]

compromise, the learned court below vide order dated 17.09.2021

has verified the compromise between the parties to the extent of

the offence under Section 406 and 323 of IPC and discharged the

petitioners of the offence under Section 406 and 323 of IPC.

However, the learned court below has declined to verify the

compromise as regards the offences under Sections 498-A of IPC

on the ground that the said offences are non-compoundable.

4. The counsel for the parties are in agreement that the dispute

between them has been amicably settled and therefore, the

complainant does not want to pursue the matter.

5. In view of compromise arrived at between the parties as well

as the aforesaid order dated 17.09.2021 of the learned court

below and applying the ratio in decision of Gian Singh vs. State

of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, State of M.P. V/s Laxmi

Narayan & Ors. [AIR 2019 SC 1296] & Ram Gopal and Ors.

Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 1489 and

1488 of 2012 decided on 29.09.2021), I deem it just and

proper to invoke inherent powers of this Court under Section 482

Cr.P.C.

6. Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed and the

petitioners are discharged of the offence under Section 498-A of

IPC as well pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate (PCPNDT Act cases), Jodhpur Metro, District Jodhpur.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

62-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)