Rajasthan High Court
Vinay Joshi S/O Late Shri Ramavatar ... vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:43184) on 10 October, 2024
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2024:RJ-JP:43184]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3468/2022
1. Vinay Joshi S/o Late Shri Ramavatar Joshi, Aged About 48
Years, Director Of M/s Vinkas Estates Private Limited,
Resident Of 150-B, Bhagirath Marg, Vijaybari, Path No. 7,
Sikar Road, Jaipur.
2. Vikas Joshi S/o Late Shri Ramavatar Joshi, Aged About 45
Years, Director Of M/s Vinkas Estates Private Limited,
Resident Of 150-B, Bhagirath Marg, Vijaybari, Path No. 7,
Sikar Road, Jaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
2. Ajay Arya S/o Late Shri Rghunath Prasad Arya, Aged
About 61 Years, Director Of M/s Raghuraj Buildhome
Private Limited, Resident Of B-123, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashutosh Bhatia
Mr. Rahul Verma
Mr. Karan Sehgal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta
Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP
Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
10/10/2024
1. This petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is filed, with a prayer
to quash the FIR No. 325/2020 registered at Police Station Vaishali
Nagar, Jaipur for offences under Sections 420, 406 and 120B of
IPC, on the basis of compromise effectuated between the parties
herein, in respect of their inter-se dispute.
2. In the instant matter learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that in spite of filing of compromise before the
[2024:RJ-JP:43184] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-3468/2022]
Investigating Authority, charge-sheet has been filed under
sections 420, 120B of IPC. It is further submitted that cognizance
has been taken. Further it is submitted that despite the fact that
the parties have amicably decided to put a quietus to the inter-se
dispute, the said proceedings are initiated.
Both the parties have marked presence (identified by their
respective counsel) and have affirmed the abovesaid contentions.
3. 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.
4. Heard and considered.
5. 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."
6. 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.
7. Considering the aforementioned, the present criminal
miscellaneous petition is allowed and the FIR No. 325/2020
registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur with all
consequential proceedings, are hereby quashed and set aside.
[2024:RJ-JP:43184] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-3468/2022]
8. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. Pending
application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
NEERU/s-35
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
