Ruparam vs State of Rajasthan - 2023 Supreme(Raj) 2274

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Raj) 2274

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
Ruparam and Others – Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Others – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 3699 of 2023
Decided On : 18-07-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Gajendra Singh Shekhawat
For the Respondents: A.R. Choudhary, Gaurav Thanvi, Sajjan Singh Karnawat

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 408, 420 - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Petition filed for quashing based on compromise - Respondent expressed disinclination to proceed - Compromise considered valid following precedent in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab - Criminal proceedings quashed. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Inherent powers of the Court - The Court may exercise inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of process when parties have reached a compromise. (Paras 5-6)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings based on a compromise, with the respondent confirming this position, relating to alleged offences under IPC.

Findings of Court:
The court accepted the compromise between the parties and invoked its inherent powers to quash proceedings.

Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed based on the parties' compromise.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the compromise between parties warranted quashing of the proceedings to prevent abuse of process.

Result: The criminal proceedings are quashed.

Table of Content
1. background of the petition for quashing (Para 1)
2. parties have reached a compromise (Para 2 , 3)
3. court analysis regarding the compromise (Para 4 , 5)
4. final ruling on the petition (Para 6 , 7)

ORDER :

1. The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.c. has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of criminal proceedings in Criminal Regular Case No. 610/2021 pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sujangarh for offence under Sections 408 , 420 IPC on the basis of compromise.

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 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 criminal proceedings initiated by the respondent No. 2 against the petitioners may be quashed.

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

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

5. 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.

6. Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed and the criminal proceedings in Criminal Regular Case No. 610/2021 pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sujangarh for offence under Sections 408 , 420 IPC are hereby quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

7. Stay petition also disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document