Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Suresh vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:43314) on 22 October, 2024
[2024:RJ-JD:43314]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7066/2024
1. Suresh S/o Shankar Lal Gadari, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
Soniyana, P.s. Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand
2. Chaturbhuj S/o Shankar Lal Gadari, Aged About 30 Years,
R/o Soniyana, P.s. Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Jagdish Gadari S/o Mangi Lal Gadari, R/o Nogama, P.s.
Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand
3. Smt. Kailashi W/o Jagdish Chandra Gadari, R/o Nogama,
P.s. Kankroli, Dist. Rajsamand
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikram Singh Jaitawat.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP
Mr. Jitendra Singh - R/2 & R/3
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Order (Oral)
22/10/2024
1. Quashing of entire criminal proceedings in Criminal Case
No.381/2022 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Rajsamand arising out of an FIR No.235/2022, dated
01.07.2022, registered at P.S. Kankroli, Rajsamand for the
offences committed under Sections 341, 323, 451, 385 & 34 of
IPC, is sought herein on the basis of compromise.
2. It is stated that the petitioners and the complainant -
respondent No.2 and respondent No. 3 are well-acquainted with
each other. The complainant-respondent No.2 filed a complaint
under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. alleging inter-alia that his wife
[2024:RJ-JD:43314] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7066/2024]
Kailashi (respondent No.3), was married in her childhood, which
was subsequently dissolved. Thereafter, she married respondent
No. 2, but petitioner No. 1 (brother of respondent No. 3) was not
happy with this marriage. On 19.05.2022, petitioner No.1,
accompanied by petitioner No.2, arrived at his house. The
petitioners assaulted the complainant's father and respondent
No.3 (wife of the respondent no.2). The complaint was forwarded
to the concerned police station for investigation, where the FIR in
question was registered.
3. On Court query, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 &
3 now states that allegations were made against the petitioners in
the heat of moment during registration of the FIR in question.
Subsequently, parties have buried their hatchet and have entered
into a compromise, pursuant to which they wish to enjoy mutual
cordiality with each other.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties
have entered into compromise is borne out from the compromise-
deed dated 19.09.2024. The respondent Nos.2 & 3 do not now
want to press charges against the petitioners.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor concurs with the factum of
compromise arrived between the parties and thus 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 Section 528
of the 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:43314] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7066/2024]
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. Criminal
proceedings in Criminal Case No.381/2022 pending before the
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand arising out
of an FIR No.235/2022, dated 01.07.2022, registered at P.S.
Kankroli, Rajsamand, are hereby quashed.
8. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(ARUN MONGA),J
21-Rmathur/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
