[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Mangi Lal vs State (2025:Rj-Jd:52400) on 4 December, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:52400]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 264/1997
Mangi Lal S/o Nanu Ram, by caste Aheer, resident of Zinc
Smeltor, Debari, Dist. Udaipur.
----Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan.
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Tirupati Chandra
Mr. Harshvardhan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, PP
Mr. Ravindra Singh, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
04/12/2025
1. The present criminal appeal has been preferred under
Section 374 Cr.P.C. assailing the judgment dated 21.05.1997
passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Cases, Udaipur in Sessions Case No.30/1996, whereby
the appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 3(1)(x)
of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and sentenced to six
months' simple imprisonment along with a fine of ₹500, and in
default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months' simple
imprisonment.
2. During pendency of the appeal, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the parties have amicably resolved their
dispute and are now maintaining cordial relations. It is urged that
in view of such settlement, the complainant does not wish to
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 12:29:26 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:52400] (2 of 3) [CRLA-264/1997]
prosecute the matter any further, and therefore the conviction
may be set aside.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant-respondent
affirms the fact of compromise and expresses no objection if the
criminal proceedings, including the conviction under challenge, are
quashed on the basis of the amicable settlement arrived at
between the parties.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record, including the compromise deed executed between the
parties.
6. During the pendency of the trial, the parties arrived at an
amicable settlement. However, as the offence in question was not
compoundable in law, the learned trial Court proceeded to record
the conviction of the appellant and passed the order of sentence
accordingly. A perusal of the compromise placed on record
unmistakably reveals that the parties have resolved their discord
irrevocably and have chosen to restore peace and cordiality. If the
conviction is permitted to subsist, it would inevitably unsettle the
harmony that now prevails between them. In such a scenario, this
Court cannot remain a mute spectator to the perpetuation of a
criminal stigma that serves no fruitful purpose. Thus, in the larger
interest of justice and to secure the ends of complete and effective
peace between the parties, it would be just and proper to invoke
the extraordinary powers vested in this Court to set aside the
conviction and the order of sentence.
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 12:29:26 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:52400] (3 of 3) [CRLA-264/1997]
7. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is allowed. The judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 21.05.1997 passed by the
learned Special Judge, SC/ST Cases, Udaipur is quashed and set
aside in view of the compromise between the parties.
8. The appellant stands acquitted of the charges. His bail bonds
stand discharged.
9. Any pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
61-Rakesh/-
(Uploaded on 11/12/2025 at 12:29:26 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
