Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Om Prakash vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:20270) on 25 April, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:20270]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2851/2025
1. Om Prakash S/o Shri Gheesa Ram, Aged About 42 Years,
R/o House No. 78, Jawahar Colony, Near Sardar Club, P.s.
Ratanada, Dist. Jodhpur
2. Sejal Alias Aarti W/o Jitendra, Aged About 20 Years, R/o
House No. 78, Jawahar Colony, Near Sardar Club, P.s.
Ratanada, Dist. Jodhpur
3. Sugna Devi W/o Shri Om Prakash, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o House No. 78, Jawahar Colony, Near Sardar Club, P.s.
Ratanada, Dist. Jodhpur
4. Santosh W/o Devendrapal, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Meghwalo Ka Baas, Khudecha Thana, Pipar
5. Devendra Pal S/o Heeraram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o
Meghwalo Ka Baas, Khudecha Thana, Pipar
6. Pushpendra Singh S/o Sajjanram, Aged About 24 Years,
R/o Nayapura, Subhash Colony, Pipar
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt. Sushila W/o Om Prakash, Aged About 47 Years, R/o
Meghwalo Ka Baas, At Present Residing At Baba Ramdeo
Nagar, Pipar City, Pipar, Jodhpur,raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Gaurav Thanvi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP
For Complainant : Mr.Gaurav Dave
Mr. Saurabh Kant Vyas
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
ORDER
25/04/2025
1. The instant criminal misc. Petition has been filed under
Section 528 BNSS for quashing of criminal proceedings in
[2025:RJ-JD:20270] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-2851/2025]
Cr.Regular Case No.1321/2019 (883/2022) pending before learned
Judicial Magistrate, Pipar City, Jodhpur District arising out of FIR
No.307/2019 registered at Police Station Pipar Shahar, District
Jodhpur District for the offence under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354
and 452 IPC.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the
dispute in between the parties has been resolved through an
amicable settlement and now, there remains no controversy in
between them and the parties do not wish to continue the criminal
proceedings further.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for
complainant-respondent admitted the factum of compromise and
submitted that they are not willing to pursue the pending criminal
proceedings and the same may be quashed on the basis of
compromise entered in between the parties.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.
5. Heard, perused the material available on record more
particularly the police report, nature of allegation and the
compromise submitted by the parties under the signatures of
accused persons namely Omprakash, Smt. Sejal @ Arti, Smt.
Sugna Devi, Smt. Santosh W/o Devendra Pal, Devendra Pal,
Pushpendra Singh, Smt. Santosh W/o Purkha Ram and
complainant Smt. Sushila W/o Omprakash, Kanchan D/o
Omprakash and Deepika D/o Omprakash before learned trial court
on 13.12.2024. From the circumstances appearing in this case,
now it can be presumed with safety that they will not support the
prosecution's case and thus, even if the prosecution would be
allowed, the chances of conviction would be very bleak. In this
[2025:RJ-JD:20270] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-2851/2025]
regard reliance can be placed on the judgment passed by Hon'ble
the Supreme Court in the case of Shiji @ Pappu & Ors.Vs.
Radhika & Ors. reported in AIR 2012 SC 49. Some of the
offence alleged in this matter are compoundable and some are
non-compoundable, however, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] has
propounded that if it is convinced that offences are entirely
personal in nature and do not affect the public peace or tranquility
and where it feels that quashing of such proceedings on account of
compromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of
justice, the High Court should not hesitate to quash the same by
exercising the inherent powers vested in it. It is observed that in
such cases, the prosecution becomes a lame prosecution and
pursuing such a lame prosecution would be a waste of time and
energy that will also unsettle the compromise and obstruct
restoration of peace. This court is aptly guided by the principles
propounded by Hon'ble the Supreme Court and feels that where
the dispute is essentially inter se between the parties, either they
are relatives, neighbors or having business relationship and which
does not affect the society at large, then in such cases, with a
view to maintain harmonious relationships between the two sides,
to end-up the dispute in between them permanently as well as for
restitution of relationship, the High Court should exercise its
inherent power to quash the FIR and all other subsequent
proceedings initiated thereto.
6. Here in this case, though the offences are not compoundable
but the parties have settled the dispute amicably and that is
essentially in between the parties which is not affecting public
[2025:RJ-JD:20270] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-2851/2025]
peace and tranquility, therefore, with a view to maintain the
harmony and to resolve the dispute finally in between the parties,
it is deemed appropriate to quash the criminal proceedings
pending against the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, the criminal misc. petition is allowed and the
Criminal Regular Case No.1321/2019 (883/2022) pending before
learned Judicial Magistrate, Pipar City, District Jodhpur arising out
of FIR No.307/2019 registered at Police Station Pipar Shahar,
District Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341,
354 and 452 IPC are hereby quashed and set aside.
8. The stay petition also stands disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
107-divya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
