S.B. CR. MISC. PETITION NO.513/2014

Ravi Khanna V/S State of Rajasthan & Anr.

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

O R D E R

S.B. CR. MISC. PETITION NO.513/2014

Ravi Khanna V/S State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Date of Order : 03^rd March, 2014

PRESENT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Mr. Shambhoo Singh, for petitioner.

Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, Public Prosecutor.

Mr. Bharat Shrimali, for respondent No.2.

BY THE COURT:-

This Criminal Misc. Petition has been

preferred by the petitioner with the prayer for

quashing the proceedings pending against the

petitioner in the court of learned Additional

Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Udaipur (for

short 'the trial court' hereinafter) in Criminal

Case No.606/2010 - State of Rajasthan Vs. Ravi

Khanna.

Brief facts of the case are that on the

basis of a complaint filed by the respondent

No.2 a case was registered against the

petitioner for the offence under Sections 323

and 498A IPC. After investigation police filed

charge sheet against the petitioner before the

S.B. CR. MISC. PETITION NO.513/2014

Ravi Khanna V/S State of Rajasthan & Anr.

2

competent court, wherein the petitioner is

facing trial for the aforesaid offence.

During the pendency of the trial, an

application was preferred on behalf of the

petitioner as well as the respondent No.2 while

stating that both the parties have entered into

compromise and, therefore, the proceedings

pending against the petitioner for the offence

under Section 323 IPC may be terminated. The

learned trial court vide order dated 17.01.2014

allowed the parties to compound the offence

under Section 323 IPC. On the very same day

another application filed on behalf of the

parties to compound the offence under Section

498A IPC has been rejected by the trial court.

Being aggrieved with this the petitioner

has preferred this Criminal Misc. Petition for

quashing the said proceedings against him.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has

argued that the complainant-respondent No.2 and

the petitioner have already entered into

compromise and on the basis of it the

petitioner has been acquitted for the offence

punishable under Section 323 IPC, therefore,

S.B. CR. MISC. PETITION NO.513/2014

Ravi Khanna V/S State of Rajasthan & Anr.

3

there is no possibility of conviction of the

petitioner for the offence punishable under

Section 498A IPC. It is also argued that no

useful purpose would be served by continuing the

trial against the petitioner for the offence

punishable under Section 498A IPC because the

same may derail the compromise arrived at

between the parties.

Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has

admitted that the parties have already entered

into compromise and respondent No.2 does not

want to press the charges against the petitioner

in relation to offence punishable under Section

498A IPC.

The Hon'ble Apex Court while answering a

reference in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State

of Punjab & Anr. reported in JT 2012(9) SC – 426

has held as below :-

“57. The position that emerges from the

above discussion can be summarised thus:

the power of the High Court in quashing a

criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in

exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is

distinct and different from the power

given to a criminal court for compounding

the offences under Section 320 of the

Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude

S.B. CR. MISC. PETITION NO.513/2014

Ravi Khanna V/S State of Rajasthan & Anr.

4

with no statutory limitation but it has to

be exercised in accord with the guideline

engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure

the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent

abuse of the process of any Court. In what

cases power to quash the criminal

proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be

exercised where the offender and victim

have settled their dispute would depend on

the facts and circumstances