Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Anil Soni vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:42748) on 19 October, 2024
[2024:RJ-JD:42748]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6640/2024
Anil Soni S/o Omprakash Soni, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Master
Colony, Pratap Colony, Near Sabji Mandi, Ward No.39, Byavar,
Ajmer (Raj)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
2. Ritu Soni D/o Late Shri Rajendar Kumar Soni, Aged About
32 Years, R/o Mansagar, Mahamandir, Jodhpur (Raj) At
Present Hospital Choraha,degana, Distt. Nagaur (Raj)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashish Gehlot.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order
19/10/2024
1. Quashing of Criminal Proceedings bearing Criminal Case
No.1748/2012 pending before the learned Gram Nyaylay,
Mandore, Jodhpur Metro, Jodhpur, pursuant to an FIR
No.49/2010, dated 27.01.2010, lodged at Police Station
Mahamandir, Jodhpur, for the alleged offences under Sections 341,
336 & 354 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 petitioner relies on an order of the learned
trial court dated 29.08.2024 and submits that based on the same
very compromise, proceedings under Section 341 of IPC were
dropped against the petitioner. However, as the remaining
offences i.e. 336 & 341 of IPC are of non-compoundable nature,
the same have not been dropped by the learned trial court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner
(accused) and respondent No.2 (complainant) have mutually
settled their differences and have buried their hatchet, pursuant to
[2024:RJ-JD:42748] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6640/2024]
which, they now wish to enjoy their cordiality with each other.
Therefore, the criminal proceedings deserves to be quashed.
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 and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom for mutual good
relations between the parties and to maintain societal peace.
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.1748/2012 pending before the learned Gram Nyaylay,
Mandore, Jodhpur Metro, Jodhpur, pursuant to an FIR
No.49/2010, dated 27.01.2010, lodged at Police Station
Mahamandir, Jodhpur, for the alleged offences under Sections 341,
336 & 354 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
2-Rmathur/-
Whether Fit for Reporting: Yes / No
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
