Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Chanda Bamaniya vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:42128) on 16 October, 2024
[2024:RJ-JD:42128]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7184/2024
1. Chanda Bamaniya W/o Suresh Kumar Bamania, Aged
About 61 Years, Near Maharana Pratap School, Vadiyo K
Dungra, Sagwara, Dungarpur. (Raj.) 314025.
2. Suresh Chandra Roat S/o Shankar Lal Roat, Aged About
40 Years, Navaghara, Varada, Varda, Dungarpur, Sagwara
(Raj.) 314029
3. Nikhil Chouhan S/o Suraj Chouhan, Aged About 33 Years,
Ward No. 5, Gordi, Sundanpur, Banswara. (Raj.) 327025.
4. Shyama Devi W/o Arjun Lal Ahari, Aged About 67 Years,
Ward No. 06, Mohila Vadiya Ka, Dungara, Sagwara,
Dungarpur, Sagwara (Raj.) 314025.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Shri Mayank Doshi S/o Narayan Lal Doshi, Pipli Chok,
Sagwara, Dungarpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B.S. Sandhu.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP
Mr. M.C. Bishnoi - R/2.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order (Oral)
16/10/2024
1. Quashing of an FIR No.0230/2024, dated 29.09.2024, for the
alleged offences committed under Sections 189(2), 333, 115(2) &
109(1) of BNS-2023, registered at P.S. Sagwada, District
Dungarpur and all consequential proceedings, are sought herein.
2. It transpires that the petitioners-accused and the respondent
No.2 - complainant are acquainted with each other. The allegation
against the petitioners is that they came at the residence of the
complainant and threatened him to give him certain documents.
It is now stated that the allegations were made against the
petitioners in the heat of the moment during the registration of
[2024:RJ-JD:42128] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7184/2024]
the FIR. Subsequently, they have buried their hatchet and have
entered into a compromise, pursuant to which they wish to enjoy
cordiality with each other.
3. Qua the invocation of Section 109(1) of BNS (Corresponding
Section 307 of IPC), both the learned counsel i.e. for the
petitioners & the complainant submit that the said offence was
though mentioned in the FIR at the time of levelling the
allegations, but subsequently, no such ingredients were found as
is borne out from the notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS dated
04.10.2024 issued to the petitioner, wherein said section was
dropped by the police officials.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the
pendency of the petition, the parties have entered into
compromise on their Will, as is borne out from the compromise
deed dated 10.10.2024 executed by the petitioners and the
complainant. In view thereof, the respondent No.2-complainant,
does not now want to press the charges against any of the
petitioners.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the
complainant concur with the factum of compromise arrived
between the parties and convey no objection to the quashing of
the FIR.
6. In the premise, in the larger interest of justice, invoking
inherent powers vested with this Court under Section 528 of
BNSS. It is deemed expedient to quash the FIR in question arising
out of a dispute between the parties and all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom for mutual good relations between
the parties and to maintain societal peace. Reference in this
[2024:RJ-JD:42128] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7184/2024]
context may be had to judgment rendered in the case of Gian
Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303].
7. Consequently, the instant petition is allowed. The impugned
FIR No.0230/2024, dated 29.09.2024, registered at P.S. Sagwada,
District Dungarpur and all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom, are hereby quashed.
8. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J
214-Rmathur/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
