Om Prakash vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 2185 Raj

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 2185 Raj
Judgement Date : 8 February, 2022

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Om Prakash vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 February, 2022

Bench: Vijay Bishnoi

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7127/2021

1. Jala Ram S/o Shri Lumba Ram, Aged About 53 Years,

2. Kishna Ram S/o Shri Lumba Ram, Aged About 68 Years,

3. Bhura Ram @ Khiya Ram S/o Shri Kishna Ram, Aged About 37 Years,

4. Gomati D/o Jala Ram, Aged About 22 Years,

5. Champa W/o Jala Ram, Aged About 50 Years, All R/o Village Khangar Ki Dhani, Khabra Khurd, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan

2. Om Prakash S/o Khema Ram,

3. Khema Ram S/o Moda Ram,

4. Mohan Ram S/o Khema Ram,

5. Paru Devi W/o Khema Ram,

6. Dhapu W/o Om Prakash, The respondent Nos.2 to 6 R/o Village Khangar Ki Dhani, Khabra Khurd, Tehsil Osian, District Jodhpur.

----Respondents CONNECTED WITH S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7128/2021

1. Om Prakash S/o Khema Ram, Aged About 38 Years,

2. Mohan Ram S/o Khema Ram, Aged About 29 Years,

3. Paru Devi W/o Kheta Ram, Aged About 60 Years,

4. Khema Ram S/o Moda Ram, Aged About 63 Years,

5. Dhapu W/o Om Prakash, Aged About 35 Years, All R/o Village Khangar Ki Dhani, Khabra Khurd, Tehsil Osian District Jodhpur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan

2. Gomati D/o Jala Ram,

3. Jala Ram S/o Shri Lumba Ram,

(2 of 5) [CRLMP-7127/2021]

4. Kishna Ram S/o Shri Lumba Ram,

5. Bhura Ram @ Khiya Ram S/o Shri Kishna Ram,

6. Champa W/o Jala Ram, All R/o Village Khangar Ki Dhani, Khabra Khurd, Tehsil Osian District Jodhpur.

----Respondents

For Petitioners in CRLMP No.7127/2021 & : Mr. Suresh Nehra For Respondents in CRLMP No.7128/2021 (through VC)

For Respondent No.1-State : Mr. Laxman Solanki Public Prosecutor

For Respondents in CRLMP No.7127/2021 : Mr. R.S. Choudhary & For Petitioners in CRLMP No.7128/2021 (through VC)

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Order

08/02/2022

These criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have

been filed by the petitioners with a prayer for quashing the FIR

Nos.308/2021 and 307/2021 of Police Station Osian, District

Jodhpur.

Brief facts of the case are that on a trivial dispute, the

petitioners and private respondents, vice versa in both the misc.

petitions, have filed two counter FIRs against each other.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in both the

misc. petitions have submitted that the petitioners and the private

respondents are neighbours and on account of some trivial dispute

a quarrel took place between them, which resulted into the

registration of the above referred impugned FIRs. It is submitted

that now both the parties have settled their dispute amicably and

entered into a compromise. It is, therefore, submitted that the

(3 of 5) [CRLMP-7127/2021]

impugned FIRs may kindly be quashed on the basis of compromise

arrived at between both the parties.

Pursuant to the direction given by this Court on 24.01.2022

the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the factual report

Nos.433 and 432 dated 07.02.2022, wherein the compromise

arrived at between the parties has been verified by the

Investigating Officer, who is investigating into the allegations

levelled in the impugned FIRs.

As per the factual report No.433 dated 07.02.2022 produced

in SBCRLMP No.7127/2021, the FIR No.308/2021 of Police Station

Osian District Jodhpur has been lodged for the offences punishable

under Sections 147, 447, 323, 307, 354, 354(A) and 379 IPC,

however, the police have found involvement of the petitioners only

for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323 and 325 IPC.

As per the factual report No.432 dated 07.02.2022 produced

in SBCRLMP No.7128/2021, the FIR No.307/2021 of Police Station

Osian District Jodhpur has been lodged for the offences punishable

under Sections 147, 451, 354(A) and 323 IPC, however, the police

have found involvement of the petitioners only for the offences

punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 323 and 324 IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the parties as well as the learned

Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

It is admitted that the dispute between the rival parties has

already been settled amicably and the same has been verified by

the Investigating Officer.

Today also learned counsel for the private respondents

appearing in both the misc. have categorically submitted that the

private respondents in both the misc. petitions do not want to

(4 of 5) [CRLMP-7127/2021]

press the allegations levelled in the impugned FIRs as the dispute

has already been resolved between the parties.

Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated

29.09.2021 rendered in Ramgopal & Anr. Vs. The State of

Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.1489/2012) along with

Krishnappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka (Criminal Appeal

No.1488/2012), after taking into consideration its earlier

decisions rendered in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported

in (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of

Punjab and Ors. reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 and several

other judgments, has held as under:-

"19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. 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 Cr.P.C or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (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."

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case

and looking to the fact that the dispute between the parties has

already been settled amicably and the private respondents of

both the misc. petitions do not want to press the allegations

levelled in the impugned FIRs, it is a fit case wherein the FIRs

(5 of 5) [CRLMP-7127/2021]

pending against the petitioners can be quashed while exercising

powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in the case of Ramgopal (supra) and in the facts and

circumstances as noted above, these criminal misc. petition are

allowed and the FIR Nos.308/2021 and 307/2021 of Police