Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Surender vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:16180) on 27 March, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:16180]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2141/2025
Surender S/o Sh Narsi Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o
Najiakhera, Ps Nathusari Chopta, Dist. Sirsa.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Veermati @ Veena D/o Sh. Prabhuram, W/o Surendra
Kumar, R/o Najia, Tehsil And Dist. Sirsa, Haryana, At
Present Sheopurabas Bhadra, Dist. Hanumangarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Bhadu
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, Dy.G.A.
Mr. Ravindra Singh, AGA
Mr. Sourabh Soni
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
27/03/2025
1. The instant criminal misc. Petition has been filed under
Section 482 Cr.PC for quashing of proceedings in CRL Case
No.151/2024 pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bhadra arising out of FIR No.411/2023 registered at
Police Station Bhadra, District Hanumangarh for the offences
under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 and 143 of the IPC.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner 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. On the basis of compromise, the accused-
petitioner has been acquitted by the trial court for offence under
Section 406, & 323 IPC and trial under Section 498A IPC has been
directed to continue.
(Downloaded on 31/03/2025 at 09:37:15 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:16180] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-2141/2025]
3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for
complainant-respondent admits the fact of compromise and
submits that he is willing if the FIR and the proceedings are
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 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. The offence alleged in this matter is 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 the 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 whether
dispute is essentially inter se between the parties, either they are
relatives, neighbours or having business relationship and which
(Downloaded on 31/03/2025 at 09:37:15 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:16180] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-2141/2025]
does not affect the society at large, then in such cases, with a
view to maintain harmonious relationships between the two sides
& for restitution of relationship and with a view to end-up the
dispute in between them permanently, the High Court should
exercise its inherent power to quash the FIR and all other
subsequent proceedings initiated thereto.
6. Here in this case, both the parties have submitted
compromise before the learned Trial Court, the Trial Court vide its
order dated 03.03.2025 verified the fact of compromise and thus,
compounded the offence under Section 406 & 323 IPC. Since the
offence under Section 498-A IPC is not compoundable, therefore,
proceeding has been kept pending for the said offence. Though,
the parties have settled the dispute amicably 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 all further
proceedings undertaken in pursuance thereof.
7. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous Petition is allowed
and the further proceedings in the court and any other
proceedings arising out of FIR as mentioned above are hereby
quashed and set aside. The accused are acquitted from the charge
and their bail bonds are discharged.
8. The stay petition also stands disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
60-chhavi/-
(Downloaded on 31/03/2025 at 09:37:15 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)