Back
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Meenu Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. By way of the instant criminal writ petition, the petitioner-complainant has approached this Court for quashing and setting aside the order dated 11.02.2023 passed by a Member of The National Lok Adalat Bench No. 2, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar whereby the Lok Adalat has allowed the Assistant Public Prosecutor to withdraw the criminal prosecution of Criminal Case No. 402/2019 (CIS No. 1483/2019) arising out of FIR No. 272/2019 registered at Police Station Patan, District Sikar and acquitted the accused respondents from offences under Sections 323 and 341 of IPC.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 11.02.2023 is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. He contends that the Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction to allow withdrawal of criminal prosecution. He argues that the Lok Adalat passed the impugned order in gross violation of principle of natural justice as the petitioner was not even noticed before passing the impugned order. He submits that the Lok Adalat can dispose of the cases only on compromise between the parties. He submits that in an identical matter being S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No
Lok Adalats lack adjudicatory power and cannot withdraw criminal prosecutions without judicial consent, emphasizing the need for mutual agreement between parties.
Once there is no compromise and/or a settlement between parties before Lok Adalat, matter has to be returned to Court from where matter was referred to Lok Adalat for deciding the matter on merits by....
Lok Adalat lacks authority to dismiss cases for non-prosecution; such cases must be returned to the referring court.
The Lok Adalat lacks the authority to dismiss cases in default of appearance and must return cases to the original court if no settlement is achieved.
Jurisdiction of Lok Adalat and consequences of non-prosecution
Lok Adalat awards are to be challenged only through writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution; they do not possess adjudicatory powers.
Point of law : whether Lok Adalat can take cognizance of such offences and has jurisdiction to decide the same. Proviso to Section 19(5) of the Act bars the jurisdiction of Lok Adalat over a case rel....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
