Rafeek Son Of Lahru vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:1495)
2024 Latest Caselaw 120 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

Rafeek Son Of Lahru vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:1495) on 9 January, 2024

Author: Mahendar Kumar Goyal

Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal

[2024:RJ-JP:1495]

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

         S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7986/2023

1.       Rafeek Son of Lahru
2.       Shajad Son of Kasam
3.       Salim Son of Aamina,
         All are Resident of Bhadaka, Gopalgarh, Bharatpur,
         Rajasthan.
                                                      ----Qua Petitioners/Accused
                                         Versus
1.       State of Rajasthan, Through PP
                                                                         Respondent

2. Ilyas Son of Jore Khan, Resident of Bhadaka, Gopalgarh, Bharatpur, Rajasthan.

Complainant/Respondent

3. Rahul Son of Rujdar, Resident of Bhadaka, Gopalgarh, Bharatpur, Rajasthan.

4. Aasid Son of Rujdar, Resident of Bhadaka, Gopalgarh, Bharatpur, Rajasthan.

----Victim/Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Atul Sharma, P.P. Mr. Arvind Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

Judgment / Order

09/01/2024

This criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

has been filed for quashing the FIR No.0027 dated 27.02.2023

lodged by the respondent No.2/complainant against the

petitioners registered at Police Station Gopalgarh, District

Bharatpur for offence under Section(s) 143, 341, 323, 336, 451 &

504 IPC and later on added Section 326 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties

are residents of the same village and are neighbourers. He

submits that the aforesaid FIR came to be lodged on account of a

[2024:RJ-JP:1495] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-7986/2023]

trivial dispute between the parties which has amicably been

settled in between the complainant, the injured persons and the

petitioners. He, in this regard, referred to the affidavits of the

complainant and the injured persons placed on record as

Annexure-2. He, therefore, prays that the criminal miscellaneous

petition be allowed and the subject FIR be quashed.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.

Learned counsel for the respondents No.2 to 4,

acknowledging the factum of settlement of dispute between the

parties, submitted that he has no objection if the FIR in question

is quashed.

Heard. Considered.

From the material on record, it is established that the

dispute between the parties has amicably been settled by them. In

view thereof, taking into consideration the law laid down by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of Gian Singh versus

State of Punjab & Anr.:(2012) 10 SCC 303, this Court deems

it just and proper to quash the subject FIR.

Resultantly, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed.

The FIR No.0027 dated 27.02.2023 registered at Police Station

Gopalgarh, District Bharatpur for offence under Section(s) 143,

341, 323, 336, 451 & 504 IPC and later on added Section 326 IPC

is quashed.

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

Manish/228

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)