[ad_1]
Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Om Veer Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:31839) on 21 July, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:31839]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4542/2025
Om Veer Singh S/o Shri Makhan Singh, Aged About 60 Years, R/
o 75, Navghat, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt. Gayatri Singh W/o Shri Sanjay Singh, R/o 75,
Navghat, Udaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Love Jain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Chundawat, P.P.
Ms. Shivangi Pathak, for complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
21/07/2025
1. The instant criminal misc. Petition has been filed under
Section 528 BNSS (Old 482 Cr.PC) for quashing of proceedings in
Case No.7483/14 pending in the Court of learned Special Addl.
Chief Judicial Magistrate (PCPNDT Act Cases), Udaipur arising out
of FIR No.23/2007 registered at Police Station Bhupalpura, District
Udaipur for the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of
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.
3. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that
the learned trial Court has attested the compromise for the
offence under Section 420 of IPC but has not attested the
(Downloaded on 22/07/2025 at 09:41:18 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:31839] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-4542/2025]
compromise for the offence under Sections 467, 468, 471 & 120-B
of IPC 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 Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.
5. Learned counsel appearing for complainant-respondent
admits the fact of compromise and submits that she is willing if
the proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise entered
in between the parties.
6. 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 by filing a joint application before the trial
court. 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 [(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
(Downloaded on 22/07/2025 at 09:41:18 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:31839] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-4542/2025]
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.
7. Here in this case, 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
criminal proceedings mentioned above.
8. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous Petition is allowed
and the further proceedings of Case No.7483/14 pending in the
Court of learned Special Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (PCPNDT
Act Cases), Udaipur are hereby quashed and set aside. The
accused are acquitted from the charge and their bail bonds are
discharged.
9. Stay petition stands disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
76-AnilKC/-
(Downloaded on 22/07/2025 at 09:41:18 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
[ad_2]
Source link