Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 10072 Raj
Judgement Date : 24 November, 2023
[2023:RJ-JD:40745]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7088/2023
1. Dhoni @ Vikram S/o Mithu Ram, Aged About 29 Years,
B/c Meghwal, R/o Ward No. 13, Mandi Pilibanga, Tehsil
Pilibanga, Dist. Hanumangarh,raj.
2. Imran Khan S/o Hasan Khan, Aged About 30 Years, B/c
Musalman, R/o Ward No. 13, Mandi Pilibanga, Tehsil
Pilibanga, Dist. Hanumangarh,raj.
3. Jaggu @ Jagga Singh S/o Singara Singh, Aged About 32
Years, B/c Bajigar R/o Ward No. 11, Mandi Pilibanga,
Tehsil Pilibanga, Dist. Hanumangarh,raj.
4. Ayub Khan S/o Aziz Khan, Aged About 32 Years, B/c
Musalman R/o Ward No. 13, Mandi Pilibanga, Tehsil
Pilibanga, Dist. Hanumangarh,raj.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Ashok Kumar S/o Ganesha Ram, B/c Jat R/o Ward No. 12,
Mandi Pilibanga, Tehsil Pilibanga, Dist. Hanumangarh,raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhoop Singh Moond
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati, PP
Mr. Mohan Ram Choudhary, for
complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
24/11/2023
1. The instant criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed
under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the
proceedings in Criminal Case No.5/2015 (State Vs. Dhoni @
Vikram & Ors.) pending in the Court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act
Cases), Hanumangarh arising out of FIR No.537/2014 registered
[2023:RJ-JD:40745] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7088/2023]
at the Police Station Pilibanga, District Hanumangarh for the
offences under Sections 307, 458, 323, 324, 382, 147, 149 of the
IPC and Sections 3(1)(x), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.
2. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that the parties
have settled their dispute by way of compromise. Learned counsel
has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the matter of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.
reported in 2012(10) SCC 303 and prayed that the FIR pending
against the petitioners be quashed in view of the compromise
between the parties.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant-respondent has
admitted the fact of compromise between the parties and
expresses his inclination in favour of quashing of the FIR on the
ground of compromise.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.
5. The parties have decided to settled the dispute amicably and
have arrived at a compromise out of the court and the
compromise deed has already been placed on record of the trial
court. Though offence under Section 307 of the IPC is involved in
the matter, which is not a compoundable offence, but on a careful
perusal of the material placed on record including the injury
[2023:RJ-JD:40745] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7088/2023]
report, it is revealing that only simple injuries were caused to the
victim, thus, prima facie a case under Section 307 of the IPC is
not made out. This court is also cognizant of the fact that in light
of the compromise arrived at between the parties, there is
imminent possibility that in case the trial is proceeded with, the
prosecution witnesses may turn hostile and it will be a worthless
exercise. In this background and also following the judgment
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Gian Singh
(supra), the instant criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and
the entire proceedings in connection with Criminal Case No.5/2015
(State Vs. Dhoni @ Vikram & Ors.) pending in the Court of Special
Judge (SC/ST Act Cases), Hanumangarh arising out of FIR
No.537/2014 registered at the Police Station Pilibanga, District
Hanumangarh and all consequential proceedings, qua the
petitioners, are hereby quashed.
6. The stay application also stands disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J 194-Pramod/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!