Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sanjeev Khichi vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:42211) on 16 October, 2024
[2024:RJ-JD:42211]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7098/2024
1. Sanjeev Khichi S/o Dulichand, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Bhopo Ka Bas, Peersa Ali, Jaipur Road,police Station Civil
Lines, District Ajmer (Raj)
2. Govind Ram S/o Tulcha Ram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Badi Kalla, Police Station Bilara, District Jodhpur (Raj)
3. Aabid Bux S/o Mehbub Bux, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Parbatpura, Byepass Jaipur Road, Ajmer (Raj)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Laxman Rathore S/o Dungar Ram, R/o Village Pichiyak,
Tehsil Bilara, District Jodhpur (Raj)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Ashok Choudhary
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP
Mr. Suresh Nehra, for R/2.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order (Oral)
16/10/2024
1. Quashing of Criminal Proceedings bearing Regular Criminal
Case No.165/2015 pending before the learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Bilara, District Jodhpur, pursuant to FIR
No.287/2012, lodged at Police Station Bilara, District Jodhpur, for
the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B 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 relies on an order of the
learned trial court dated 04.10.2024 and submits that based on
the same very compromise, proceedings under Section 420 have
been dropped against the petitioners.
[2024:RJ-JD:42211] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-7098/2024]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as the
remaining offences i.e. 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC are of
non-compoundable nature, the same have not been dropped by
the learned trial court.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the
complainants 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. Regular Criminal
Case No.165/2015 pending before the learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Bilara, District Jodhpur, pursuant to FIR
No.287/2012, lodged at Police Station Bilara, District Jodhpur, for
the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC,
and consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, qua the
petitioners, are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise
arrived between the parties.
7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J
208-skm/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
