Anupam Dixit vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 17917 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6349/2021

Anupam Dixit S/o Sh. Prabhat Kumar Dixit, Aged About 32 Years, B/c Brahmin, R/o A/3 Binnani Gram, Pindwara, Dist. Sirohi (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Smt. Sangeeta W/o Sh. Ashok Kumar Ojha, B/c Brahmin, R/o 4 E 137, Jainarayan Vyas Colony, Bikaner (Raj.).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kaushal Gautam For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.S. Rajpurohit, PP Mr. Mohan Ram Choudhary

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment

29/11/2021

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by mistake,

he has made respondent no.2 Smt. Sneha W/o Anupam Dixit as

respondent no.2 whereas, instead of Smt. Sneha, Smt. Sangeeta

W/o Ashok Kumar Ojha, who is the complainant, should have been

named as respondent no.2 in the present case.

Learned counsel submits that he has filed the amended

cause title.

The amended cause title filed is taken on record.

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 is placed on record.

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-6349/2021]

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).

It is also submitted that upon the aforementioned

compromise, the learned trial court below vide order dated

22.10.2021, has verified the compromise between the parties to

the extent of the offence under Section 77 of I.T. Act and has

discharged the petitioner of the offence under Section 77 of I.T.

Act. However, the learned court below has declined to verify the

compromise as regards the offence under Section 67 of I.T. Act on

the ground that the said offence is non-compoundable.

The counsel for the parties are in agreement that the dispute

between them has been amicably settled and therefore, the

complainant-respondent No.2 does not want to pursue the matter.

In view of compromise arrived at between the parties and

applying the ratio 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), 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 offence under Section 67 of the I.T.

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-6349/2021]

Act as well in relation to Criminal Case No.852/2017 pending

before the CJM, Bikaner.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

55-Shahenshah/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)