Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Lalit Kumar Vyas vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:694) on 6 January, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:694]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 9386/2024
1. Lalit Kumar Vyas S/o Shri Jainarayan Vyas, Aged About
69 Years, R/o New Housing Board, Pali.
2. Smt. Madhu Vyas W/o Shri Lalit Kumar Vyas, Aged About
63 Years, R/o New Housing Board, Pali.
3. Priyank Kumar S/o Shri Lalit Kumar Vyas, Aged About 41
Years, R/o New Housing Board, Pali.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt. Kavita D/o Shri Devilal Shrimali, R/o Rajendra
Nagar, Bhinmal Bypass Road, Jalore.
----Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr. K.L. Thakur
For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Shriram Choudhary, AGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
06/01/2025
1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been filed under
Section 482 Cr.PC on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of the
entire proceeding pending against them in the Court of learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalore (hereinafter to be referred as 'the
trial court') in Criminal Regular Case No.38/2015, arising out of
FIR No.2/2014 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District
Jalore for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 420 of IPC,
on the ground of compromise.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute
in this matter is inter se between the parties which does not affect
[2025:RJ-JD:694] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-9386/2024]
the societal interest or anyway disturb the tranquility or public
peace. It is further submitted that both the parties have settled
their disputes through amicable settlement, for which a
compromise-deed has been executed and submitted before the
learned trial court.
3. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners
that the charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioners for the
offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 420 of IPC, however, the
learned trial court has attested the compromise for the offences
under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC but refused to attest the
compromise for the offence under Section 498-A of IPC as the
same is not compoundable and kept the proceeding pending by it.
It is submitted that as the parties have entered into compromise,
there remains no controversy in between them and the parties do
not wish to continue the criminal proceedings further.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the
judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC
303.
5. It is emanating from the copies of order-sheets of the
learned trial court and the compromise-deed annexed with the
instant misc. petition that the complainant-respondent No.2 is
willing if the FIR and the proceedings are quashed on the basis of
compromise entered in between the parties.
6. Learned AGA has opposed the petition.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record more particularly nature of allegation
[2025:RJ-JD:694] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-9386/2024]
and copies of the order-sheets of the learned trial court as well as
the compromise-deed executed in between the parties. The
parties to the lis have resolved their dispute amicably and do not
wish to continue the criminal proceedings and have jointly prayed
for quashing of the same.
8. Some of the offences alleged in this matter are
non-compoundable, however, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (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, neighbours 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.
[2025:RJ-JD:694] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-9386/2024]
9. Here in this case, though some of the offences are not
compoundable but the parties have settled the dispute amicably,
the complainant-respondent No.2 do not wish to continue the
proceedings against the petitioners and, that is essentially in
between the parties, which is not affecting public 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 FIR and the entire proceedings
undertaken in pursuance thereof.
10. Accordingly the instant criminal misc. petition is allowed. The
entire proceeding pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Jalore in Criminal Regular Case No.38/2015 arising out
of FIR No.2/2014 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana,
District Jalore are hereby quashed and set aside.
11. The accused petitioners are acquitted from the charges and if
they are on bail, their bail bonds are discharged.
12. The stay petition is disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
Abhishek Kumar
S.No.58
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
