Praveen Kumar vs State of Rajasthan - 2023 Supreme(Raj) 2173

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Raj) 2173

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Praveen Kumar and Others – Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Others – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 1849 of 2023
Decided On : 20-04-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Gajendra Singh Shekhawat
For the Respondents: N.S. Bhati, Manoj Pareek

Headnote:(A) Penal Code, 1860 - Section 308 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of FIR on basis of compromise - Petitioners filed for quashing FIR No. 355/2018 under Section 308 due to compromise between parties, with complainant not wanting to proceed further - Court applies the ratio in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. - Court’s inherent powers invoked to quash FIR. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Compromise - Legal effect of compromise in criminal proceedings - When complainant does not wish to pursue the case, FIR may be quashed. (Para 3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking to quash an FIR under Section 308 IPC based on a compromise with the complainant, who agreed not to pursue the matter further.

Findings of Court:
The complaint was found not to warrant continuation as the complainant expressed disinterest in proceeding.

Issues: The central issue was whether the FIR could be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that when a compromise between the parties is reached, particularly with the complainant not wishing to proceed, the FIR can be quashed as per the precedent set in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Result: Petition allowed; FIR quashed.

ORDER :

1. The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of FIR No. 355/2018 registered at Police Station Sadar, District Sriganganagar and all consequential proceedings for offence under Section 308 of IPC on the basis of compromise entered between the parties.

2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter has already been compromised between the parties and it is borne out from the compromise that respondent No. 2-complainant is not inclined to proceed further in the matter. Counsel has placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303. In these circumstances, the impugned FIR and all consequential proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise.

3. Counsel for the respondent No. 2 (complainant) concurs the fact of compromise and submits that in view of the compromise, the respondent No. 2 (complainant) does not want to proceed further in the matter.

4. In view of compromise arrived at between the parties and applying the ratio in decision of Gian Singh (Supra), I deem it just and proper to invoke inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

5. Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed and FIR No. 355/2018 registered at Police Station Sadar, District Sriganganagar and all consequential proceedings for offence under Section 308 of IPC lodged against the petitioners are hereby quashed on the basis of compromise deed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document