Suraj Kumar Son Of Shri Gayarsi Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 4792 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

      S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5949/2022

1.     Suraj Kumar Son Of Shri Gayarsi Ram, R/o Mohalla
       Dawooddpur, Thana Shivaji Park Alwar, At Present Hall
       No.6, Achrol House Civil Lines, Jaipur.
2.     Omprakash Meena S/o Harisingh Meena, R/o Gram Naya
       Baas Thana Neemkathana Dist. Sikar At Present Hall No.
       6, Achrol House Civil Lines, Jaipur.
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
2.     Dinesh Sethi S/o Goverdhan Sethi, R/o 1188, Partaniyo
       Ka Rasta, Jhori Bazar, Jaipur.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Imran Khan, PP Mr. Yogesh Pujari, Adv. for Mr. Kapil Kumar, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Order

13/07/2022

Heard the parties.

Petitioners have sought for quashing of FIR No.259/2011

registered with Police Station Vidhayakpuri Jaipur at Annexure-1,

on the ground of compromise of the case between the parties.

Petitioners have further sought for setting aside judgment of

conviction of the trial Judge for offences under Sections 384 and

392 of IPC.

On the basis of compromise, the petitioners have further

sought for quashing of the order of the Appellate Court dated

29.06.2022 passed in Criminal Appeal No.102/2017, whereby

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-5949/2022]

prayer for allowing the appeal on the basis of compromise has

been refused on the ground that conviction has been recorded

under Sections 384 and 392 of IPC. Both the offences are non-

compoundable.

The impugned FIR cannot be quashed at this stage when the

trial has already resulted in conviction. Hence, prayer for quashing

the FIR was refused. Judgment of the learned trial Judge

convicting the appellants cannot be quashed in exercise of power

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., as Criminal Appeal No.102/2017

against the said judgment is already pending before the Appellate

Court, hence this prayer is also refused. So far as order of learned

Appellate Court dated 29.06.2022 is concerned, I do not find any

infirmity with the same, as this is a fact that conviction has been

recorded under Sections 384 and 392 of IPC by the learned trial

Court, both the offences are non-compoundable, hence the trial

Court judgment cannot be allowed to be made redundant on the

basis of compromise.

Therefore, this petition has got no merit, accordingly petition

stands dismissed.

Let the Appellate Court decide the appeal at the earliest

preferably within one month.

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J

Ashwani/-89

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)