Subey Singh Son Of Hari Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:35193)
2024 Latest Caselaw 5401 Raj/2

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 5401 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 21 August, 2024

Rajasthan High Court

Subey Singh Son Of Hari Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:35193) on 21 August, 2024

Author: Sameer Jain

Bench: Sameer Jain

[2024:RJ-JP:35193]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

        S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5347/2024

1.       Subey Singh Son Of Hari Ram,
2.       Sandeep Son Of Chittar,
3.       Sachin Son Of Siyaram,
         All Resident Of Village Mughalpur, Tehsil Bansur, District
         Kotputli- Behror.
4.       Pradeep Son Of Dalip, Resident Of Uchpur, Tehsil Bansur,
         District Kotputli- Behror.
                                                             Accused-Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
2.       Manish Son Of Kailash Chand, Resident Of Village Gunta,
         Tehsil Bansur, District Kotputli- Behror.
                                                  Complainant--Respondents

For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Jai Raj Tantia
For State(s)              :     Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP
                                with Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore
For Complainant           :     Mr. Hari Prasad Jangid with
                                Mr. Girraj Prasad


                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
                             Order

21/08/2024

1. This petition under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is filed, with a

prayer to quash the FIR No.180/2024 registered at Police Station

Bansur District Kotputli-Behror for offences under Sections 143,

341, 323, 427, 452, 506 and 504 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)

(s), 3(2) (va) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) act, 1989 on

the basis of compromise effectuated between the parties herein,

in respect of their inter-se dispute.

2. Learned counsel for both the parties have submitted that the

dispute at hand is inter-se private in nature, which has been

resolved by the parties amicably.

[2024:RJ-JP:35193] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-5347/2024]

3. Heard and considered.

4. At the outset, this Court deems it appropriate to place

reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in

Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and

Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in

[2022 (14) SCC 531], relevant portion of which is reproduced

below:

"12. The High Court, therefore, having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are non- compoundable."

5. In view of the position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in aforementioned case, and considering the personal nature

of dispute, which has been amicably settled between parties, this

Court deems it just and proper to allow the present misc. petition.

Compromise is taken on record.

6. Considering the aforementioned, the present criminal

miscellaneous petition is allowed and the FIR No.180/2024

registered at Police Station Bansur District Kotputli-Behror with all

consequential proceedings, are hereby quashed and set aside.

7. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. Pending

application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

(SAMEER JAIN),J