Rakesh vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 16159 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4632/2021

1. Rakesh S/o Shivkaran, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Rajnagar Police Station Neemkathana District Sikar. At Present Manager Hanumangarh Central Cooperative Bank Branch Dungrana Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

2. Duli Chand S/o Gangajal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Malsisar, Police Station Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

3. Om Prakash S/o Shri Jalu Ram, Aged About 55 Years, R/o VPO Malsisar, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

4. Reema Kumari D/o Rakesh Kumar, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Rajnagar Police Staton Neemkathana District Sikar. At Present Dungrana, Tehsil Bhadra District Hanumangarh.

5. Ritu Rani W/o Shri Yashveer, Aged About 27 Years, R/o VPO Malsisar Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

6. Ramniwas S/o Shri Mahaveer, Aged About 25 Years, R/o VPO Kunji, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

7. Sunita W/o Om Prakash, Aged About 36 Years, R/o VPO Malsisar, Tehsil Bhadra, District Hanumangarh.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan

2. Devendra Kumar S/o Shri Ram Lal, R/o Ding Mandi, Nathusari Chopta, District Sirsa (Haryana)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. S. Gaur for Mr. R. S. Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP Mr. Mohan Ram Choudhary, for complainant-respondent No.2

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

25/10/2021

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-4632/2021]

The present misc. petition has been filed for quashing the

F.I.R. No.0250/2021 registered at Police Station Bhadra, District

Hanumanagrh for the offence under Sections 409, 420 & 120-B of

the I.P.C.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties

have compromised the matter outside the Court and the

compromise deed has been filed before this Court.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the compromise deed

was also produced before the Investigating Officer and as per the

factual report received, the same has been verified by the

Investigating Officer. The factual report produced by the learned

Public Prosecutor is taken on record.

The compromise is not disputed by the learned counsel for

the complainant-respondent No2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the

judgment of the Hon'ble 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)

and submits that the proceedings arising out of FIR may be

quashed.

In view of the aforementioned compromise arrived at

between the parties and considering the fact that the compromise

is not disputed by learned counsel for the complainant as also

applying the law laid down in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab

(Supra), State of M.P. V/s Laxmi Narayan & Ors. (Supra) &

Ram Gopal and Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Supra)

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-4632/2021]

this Court deems it just and proper to invoke inherent powers

under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed and the

impugned F.I.R. No.0250/2021 registered at Police Station Bhadra,

District Hanumanagrh for the offence under Sections 409, 420 &

120-B of the I.P.C is quashed.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 25-SunilS/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)