Sonu vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 16964 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5989/2021

1. Sonu D/o Sh. Khuman Ji Khatik, Aged About 21 Years, R/ o Panchwati Colony, Near Alok School, Kankroli Dist. Rajsamand.

2. Dimple W/o Sh. Rajesh Khatik, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Panchwati Colony, Near Alok School, Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand.

----Petitioners/ Complainant Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Bherusingh S/o Sh. Deepsingh, R/o Panchwati Colony, Near Alok School, Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand.

3. Smt. Mohani Bai W/o Sh. Deepsingh, R/o Panchwati Colony, Near Alok School, Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand.

4. Harshita D/o Deepsingh, R/o Panchwati Colony, Near Alok School, Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jayant Joshi Mr. V.D. Gaur For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati, PP Mr. Hardik Gautam

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment

15/11/2021

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.

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.

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-5989/2021]

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

compromise, the learned court below vide order dated

14.09.2021, has verified the compromise between the parties to

the extent of the offences under Sections 451, 323, 427 of IPC

and discharged the petitioners of the offence under Sections 451,

323, 427 of IPC. However, the learned court below has declined to

verify the compromise as regards the offences under Sections

354, 34 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act 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-petitioner No.1 does not want to pursue the matter.

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

as the aforesaid order dated 14.09.2021 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

petitioner is discharged of the offences under Sections 354, 34 of

IPC and under Section 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act as well the subsequent

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-5989/2021]

proceedings of the same pending before the Judicial Magistrate,

Rajsamand in connection with FIR No.386/2019 registered at

Police Station Kankroli, District Rajsamand.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 64-/Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)