Shankar Lal vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8406 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:34443] (1 of 3) [CRLMP-5685/2023]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5685/2023

1. Shankar Lal S/o Shri Girdhari Lal Rebari, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village - Valaraya Ki Dhani, P.s. Khamnor, District Rajsamand (Raj.)

2. Ganpat S/o Shri Unkar Ji Rebari, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Rebariyon - Ki - Dhani, Sodela, P.s Kunwariya, District Rajsamand (Raj.)

3. Suresh S/o Shri Champa Ji Rebari, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Rebariyon - Ki - Dhani, Saiyon-Ka-Khera, P.s. Khamnor, District Rajsamand (Raj.)

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Mamata Kanwar D/o Shri Shiv Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ward No. 5, Hajela-Ka-Bas, Samicha, District Rajsamand (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP.

Mr. Dhanpal Singh.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

11/10/2023

The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR

No.36/2023 registered at Police Station Shreenath Ji Mandir,

Rajsamand for the offences under Sections 376D and 506 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

parties have settled their disputes and have arrived at a

compromise.

[2023:RJ-JD:34443] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-5685/2023]

Learned counsel for the complainant concurs the factum of

compromise and submits that in view of the compromise, the

complainant is not inclined to proceed further in the matter.

Attention of the Court was drawn towards an affidavit filed

by the prosecutrix wherein, she has stated that she has decided to

resolve the dispute amicably with the present petitioners in the

spirit of Lok Adalat and does not wish to continue with the present

litigation.

This Court is conscious of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the matter of Prashant Bhartiya Vs. State of

Delhi & Ors. in Criminal Appeal No.708 of 2021 decided on

30.07.2021, relevant portion of which reads as follows:-

"3. Respondent No. 2 had lodged a complaint alleging, inter alia, that the Appellant had committed an offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. It is undisputed that both the Accused (Appellant) and Respondent No. 2 were living together for a considerable while. The complainant's allegation is that the Appellant duped her by misrepresenting to her that he is divorced. The complainant, according to the accused, is not unmarried and her marriage subsists.

4. During pendency of the proceedings, the parties were referred to mediation having regard to the fact that a child was born in the meanwhile (i.e. in the year 2018). As a consequence, a mediated settlement limited to the maintenance and upkeep of the child was arrived at by them.

5. Having regard to these facts and the submissions made on behalf of the complainant - who does not dispute that this may not be an appropriate case for pursuing the prosecution further, this Court is of the considered view that the criminal proceedings must be quashed.

6. In the peculiar circumstances of the present case, the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside; the FIR (No. 616) and all consequent proceedings be quashed. It is, however, made clear that this order will not come in the way or in any manner prejudice the contentions of the parties in any other pending proceedings, which shall 20-09-2022 be decided in accordance with law.

7. The appeal is allowed to the above extent."

[2023:RJ-JD:34443] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-5685/2023]

In view of compromise arrived at between the parties, as

also the careful perusal of the affidavit of prosecutrix and applying

the ratio of the decision in Prashant Bhartiya Vs. State of

Delhi (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to invoke

inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed. The FIR

No.36/2023 registered at Police Station Shreenath Ji Mandir,

Rajsamand for the offences under Sections 376D and 506 IPC and

all subsequent proceedings sought to be taken thereunder against

the petitioners, are quashed.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 789-Tikam/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)