1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

O R D E R

S. B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION No.2332/2015.

: :

Dinesh Shetty & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

: :

Date of Order : 15.05.2015

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR AGARWAL

Mr. Anil Yadav on behalf of Mr. Ashvin Garg, for the petitioner.

Mr. Ram Ratan Gurjar, P. P. for the State.

Mr. Kapil Gupta, for the respondent No.2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the

accused-petitioners have come to this Court with a prayer to quash the

proceedings pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.8,

Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Criminal Case No.83/2015 for the offences

punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC readwith Sections

66(C) & 66 (D) of the Information Technology Act mainly on the ground that the

parties have entered into compromise and amicably settled their dispute and now

no dispute remains between them.

The brief relevant facts are that on the First Information Report

lodged by the complainant-respondent, after investigation charge-sheet for the

aforesaid offences was filed against the accused-petitioners and on that basis

above said criminal proceedings in Case No.83/2015 were initiated and during trial

both the parties filed an application under Section 320 Cr.P.C. to permit

compounding of the aforesaid offences. The trial Court partly allowed the

application and permitted to compound the offence under Section 419 & 420 IPC

vide order dated 28.4.2015 but the prayer in respect of other offences was

refused because the offences are not compoundable. In these circumstances, the

petitioners have come to this Court by way of this petition to quash the aforesaid

criminal proceedings pending before the trial Court on the ground that the parties

2

have resolved their dispute.

It was jointly submitted by the learned counsel for the parties that

due to some misunderstanding the respondent-complainant lodged the report, but

now the parties have entered into compromise and amicably settled their dispute.

It was further submitted that the dispute is between private parties and the case

is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by the Larger Bench of Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr-reported

in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of Dimpey Gujral Vs. Union

Territory through Administratator, U. T. Chandigarh & Ors. reported in

2013 Cr.L.J. (SC) 520, and the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed on

the ground of compromise arrived between the parties although the offences are

not compoundable.

On consideration of submissions made on behalf of the respective

parties and the material made available on record, I find that the instant case is

covered by the principle of law laid down by the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra) and by the judgment in the case

of Dimpey Gujral (supra).

In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and the

criminal proceedings pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate

No.8, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Criminal Case No.83/2015 are quashed and

set aside and as a consequence thereof the accused-petitioners are acquitted for

the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468 & 471 & 120-B IPC readwith

Sections 66(C) & 66 (D) of the Information Technology Act. In view of the order

passed above, the stay application is disposed of.

In view of the acceptance of the misc. petition, it is ordered that the

petitioners be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.

(PRASHANT KUMAR AGARWAL),J.

A.Arora/-Item No.99.

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the

judgment/order being emailed.” AMIT ARORA