Back
2019 Supreme(Raj) 1253
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.
Vishnu Verma And Others - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. And Others - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8147 of 2018 Connected with Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8195 of 2018
Decided On : 16-01-2019
Mr. R.S. Bhardwaj, for the Appellant in SBCRLMP No. 8147/2018; Mr. N.S. Dhakad PP for the State for respondent No. 1, Mr. Aveesh Mourya on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Sharma for respondent No. 2. For the Appellant in SBCRLMP No. 8195/2018:- Mr. Aveesh Mourya on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Sharma, for the Respondent in SBCRLMP No. 8147/2018; Mr. N.S. Dhakad PP for the State for respondent No. 1 Mr. R.S. Bhardwaj for respondents, for the Respondent in SBCRLMP No. 8195/2018
The court can quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to advance the interest of justice, especially in cases of private disputes that have been amicably resolved.
Headnote:
Compromise - Dispute Resolution - The court quashed the proceedings based on a private dispute that was amicably resolved between the parties, citing the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another.
Fact of the Case:
The parties were involved in two separate FIRs for various offenses, but the dispute was amicably resolved due to the intervention of elders and members of the society.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dispute was private in nature and that the compromise between the parties should be granted due sanctity, leading to the quashing of the FIRs and subsequent proceedings.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another to support its decision to quash the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the interest of justice.
Final Decision: Both the petitions were accepted, and the impugned FIRs and subsequent proceedings were quashed.
JUDGMENT
1. By this common order, SBCRLMP No. 8147/2018 preferred by Vishnu Verma and Pankaj against State of Rajasthan and Majid Qureshi and SBCRLMP No. 8195/2018 instituted by Majid Qureshi and Rashid Qureshi against State of Rajasthan and Smt. Mithlesh wife of Vishnudatt Verma shall be decided together.
2. Mr. R.S. Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners Vishnu Verma and Pankaj has submitted that Majid Qureshi lodged the FIR No. 221/2018 at Police Station Mathura Gate, Bharatpur for the offences under Sections 143, 341, 323 and 379 IPC, whereas Majid Qureshi and and his brother Rashid Qureshi were named as accused by Smt. Mithlesh wife of Vishnudatt Verma in FIR No. 223/2018 registered at same Police Station Mathura Gate, Bharatpur for the offences under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354, 379 IPC and Sections 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w) and 3(2)(VA) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. It is apparent that FIR Nos. 221/2018 and 223/2018 registered at same police station i.e. Mathura Gage, Bharatpur contain version and cross-version.
4. In SBCRLMP No. 8147/2018, Mr. R.S. Bhardwaj has caused appearance for the petitioners and Mr. Aveesh Mourya on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Sharma has caused appearance for the respondent No. 2 Majid Qureshi. Similarly, in SBCRLMP No. 8195/2018, Mr. Mr. Aveesh Mourya on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Sharma has caused appearance for the petitioners and Mr. R.S. Bhardwaj has caused appearance for the respondent No. 2 Smt. Mithlesh.
5. The accused and the complainant of both the cases are present in the court and they have been identified by their respective counsel. The accused and complainant of both the cases have stated that since they are residing in same vicinity, due to intervention of elders and respectables of the society, the dispute has been amicably resolved in order to promote ever lasting peace, amity and harmony.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of both the FIRs, this Court is of the view that the dispute is private in nature.
7. The learned counsel for the parties have jointly relied upon Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 , to contend that that this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceedings to advance the interest of justice.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the compromise is finest hour between the parties and this Court ought to grant due sanctity to the amicable resolution of dispute between the parties.
9. Consequently, taking totality of circumstances, and ratio of law laid in the case of Gian Singh (supra), both the petitions (SBCRLMP Nos. 8147/2018 and 8195/2018) are accepted and the impugned FIR No(s). 221/2018 and 223/2018 registered Police Station Mathura Gate, Bharatpur, along with all subsequent proceedings are quashed.
