High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 03 RAJ CK 0023

Kamal Gupta @APPELLANT@Hash State Of Rajasthan And Ors

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 5 March 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Misccellaneous (Petition) No. 839 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 401 words

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that the proceedings arising out of Criminal Case No. 96/2014 titled as State vs.

Kamal Gupta & Ors, which is pending in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, No.7, Jaipur Metropolitan City, Jaipur, in view of the

compromise arrived between the parties be quashed.

Mr. Harsh Sharma counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Jaideep Singh counsel appearing for the complainant respondent no.2 have jointly

stated that the complainant respondent no.2 had lodged FIR No.412/2011 at Police Station Bajaj Nagar, East, Jaipur for the offences under Sections

420, 467, 468, 471, 448 and 120B IPC, alleging therein that the petitioner had forged the rent agreement and on the basis thereof had obtained a

license to sell crackers.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that during the pendency of the petition, better sense has prevailed between the parties and

compromise has been affected between landlord and alleged tenant. It is further contended that the shop in question has been demolished during

expansion of the road.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 28.11.2017 passed by the court of Additional Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, No.7, Jaipur Metropolitan City, Jaipur, whereby compromise was verified and accepted qua offence under Section 420 IPC.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the trial court having compounded the offence under Section 420 IPC, held that the offences

under Sections 467, 468 and 471 cannot be compounded as the same are non-compoundable.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 to urge that this

Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceedings where dispute inter se the parties is private in nature.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that hour of compromise is a finest hour in the life of the parties and this

Court should give due credence to the same, as the dispute is private in nature. Relying upon the case of Gian Singh (supra), the present petition is

accepted and the impugned FIR No.412/2011 registered at Police Station Bajaj Nagar, East, Jaipur for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471,

448 and 120B IPC along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed.