Rajasthan High Court
Smt. Pushpa Biyani W/O Shri Jugal ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 October, 2021
Bench: Ashok Kumar Gaur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.1771/2021
1. Smt. Pushpa Biyani W/o Shri Jugal Kishore Biyani, Aged
About 72 Years, R/o C-1, L.S. Nagar, Vidhyadhar Nagar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Rajeev Biyani S/o Jugal Kishore Biyani, Aged About 52
Years, R/o C-1, L.S. Nagar, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur,
Rajasthan. --Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
2. Madho Singh (Now Deceased) S/o Lt. Shri Guman Singh,
R/o Lekhar, Amer, Chandwaji, Jaipur Rural, Rajasthan
Through Legal Representative/legal Heir.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.S.S. Hora, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Amit Malani, Adv. for
Mr.Mohit Khandelwal, Adv. for
complainant
Mr.Laxman Meena, Public Prosecutor.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR
Order
22/10/2021
The present misc. petition has been filed under Section 482
Cr.P.C. by the petitioners for quashing FIR No.264/2017 registered
at Police Station Chandwaji, District Jaipur (Rural) on 25.07.2017
for the offences under Sections 420 & 406 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
complainant--Madho Singh has expired during pendency of the
criminal proceedings and his two sons namely, Himmat Singh and
Narendra Singh and five daughters of Late Shri Madho Singh have
entered into a compromise with the petitioners.
(2 of 4) [CRLMP-1771/2021]
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
compromise so arrived at between the parties was placed before
this Court on 12.08.2021 and this Court had directed the parties
to file their compromise before the Registrar (Judicial) of this
Court to verify and attest the same.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners as well as two sons of the complainant--Late Shri
Madho Singh had appeared before the Registrar (Judicial) on
12.08.2021 and the relevant report with regard to compromise
has also been submitted before this Court by the Registrar
(Judicial) vide his report dated 12.08.2021.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has also filed a misc.
application No.03/2021 whereby additional documents have been
placed on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that an
affidavit has duly been executed by all the legal heirs of the
complainant--Late Shir Madho Singh and it has been specifically
mentioned by them that as per terms of the compromise, all
actions have been taken by the parties and even registered sale
deed has already been executed in favour of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of
compromise arrived at between the parties, the present matter
may be disposed of by quashing the FIR No.264/2017.
Learned counsel submitted that the alleged dispute between
the complainant and the petitioners is in respect of a property
transaction and as such, it is a dispute of civil nature and as such,
it does not affect the society at all.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that if the
dispute is of a civil nature and offences are of non-compoundable
(3 of 4) [CRLMP-1771/2021]
nature, the same can be decided by this Court by exercising
inherent powers as per law laid down by the Apex Court in the
case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in
[(2012) 10 SCC 303].
Learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute the
fact of compromise being entered between the parties.
Learned counsel further admits that terms of the
compromise like payment, etc. has also been acted upon.
Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the prayer made in
the petition can be decided by this Court as per the law laid down
by the Apex Court.
This Court finds that the Apex Court in case of Ramgopal &
Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal
Nos.1488 & 1489/2012 decided on 29.09.2021, has again
reiterated the principles for compounding the non-compoundable
offences while exercising the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The relevant para of the judgment passed in the case of
Ramgopal & Ors. Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh (supra) is
quoted hereunder:-
"19. We thus sum-up and hold that as
opposed to Section 320 Code of Criminal
Procedure where the Court is squarely guided
by the compromise between the parties in
respect of offences 'compoundable' within the
statutory framework, the extra-ordinary power
enjoined upon a High Court Under Section 482
Code of Criminal Procedure or vested in this
Court Under Article 142 of the Constitution,
can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds
of Section 320 Code of Criminal Procedure
Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of
wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully
in the context of quashing criminal
proceedings, bearing in mind:
(4 of 4) [CRLMP-1771/2021]
(i) Nature and effect of the offence on the
conscious of the society;
(ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any;
(iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between
the Accused and the victim; &
(iv) Conduct of the Accused persons, prior to
and after the occurrence of the purported
offence and/or other relevant considerations."
This Court finds that the alleged offences levelled against the
petitioners are in respect of transaction of land and further the
dispute appears to be of purely civil nature and furthermore the
parties have already entered into compromise and accordingly,
this Court keeping in mind the principles laid down by the Apex
Court in the case of Ramgopal & Ors. Versus State of Madhya
Pradesh (supra), deems it proper to quash the FIR No.264/2017
dated 25.07.2017, registered at Police Station Chandwaji, District
Jaipur (Rural).
Accordingly, the criminal misc. petition stands allowed.
(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J
Parul Sharma/Ramesh Vaishnav/148
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
