Ashok Panwar vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:41615)
2024 Latest Caselaw 8938 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ashok Panwar vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:41615) on 10 October, 2024

[2024:RJ-JD:41615]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6936/2024

1.       Ashok Panwar S/o Amar Chand Panwar, Aged About 25
         Years, R/o Malani Bas, Near Hanuman Mandir, Ward No.
         05, Nokha Dist. Bikaner
2.       Bhanwari Devi W/o Amar Chand Panwar, Aged About 52
         Years, R/o Malani Bas, Near Hanuman Mandir, Ward No.
         05, Nokha Dist. Bikaner
                                                                   ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Dimple W/o Ashok Panwar, D/o Sita Ram, R/o Ashok
         Colony, Ram Sagar Chouraha, Bhadvasia Road, Jodhpur
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Avinash Bhati.
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, P.P.
                                Mr. Hanuman Prajapat, AGA.
                                Mr. C.P. Chouhan for Mr. Bhanwani
                                Singh, for R/2 (complainant).



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order

10/10/2024

1. Quashing of Criminal Proceedings bearing Criminal Case

No.26/2022 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2,

Jodhpur Metropolitan, pursuant to an FIR No.164/2021 dated

02.12.2021, lodged at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jodhpur City

East, for the alleged offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 323

of IPC, is sought herein, on the basis of compromise arrived

between the parties.

2. On a Court query qua the genuineness of the compromise,

learned counsel for the petitioners points out to an order of the

[2024:RJ-JD:41615] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6936/2024]

learned trial court dated 03.08.2024 and submits that based on

the same very compromise, proceedings under Section 406 and

323 were dropped against the petitioners. However, as the

remaining offence i.e. 498-A of IPC is of non-compoundable

nature, the charge under said section has not been dropped by

the learned trial court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties

have buried their hatchet and have thus entered into a

compromise. Pursuant to which, they now wish to enjoy their

cordiality with each other.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the

complainant concur with the fact of compromise and submit that

in view of the compromise, they have no objection.

5. The genuineness of compromise is not in dispute. However,

since the trial Court was not empowered to compound certain

offences, the criminal proceedings could not be quashed. In the

premise, in the larger interest of justice, invoking inherent powers

vested with this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Now Section 528

of BNSS), it is deemed expedient to quash the FIR/proceedings in

question. Reference in this context may be had to judgment

rendered in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.

[(2012) 10 SCC 303].

6. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Criminal Case

No.26/2022 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2,

Jodhpur Metropolitan, pursuant to FIR No.164/2021 dated

02.12.2021, lodged at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jodhpur City

East, for the alleged offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 323

[2024:RJ-JD:41615] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6936/2024]

of IPC, is hereby quashed on the basis of compromise arrived

between the parties.

7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(ARUN MONGA),J 31-Sumit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)