Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1650 (RAJ)

Laxman Joshi v. State

2021-09-06

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

body2021
ORDER 1. In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned. 2. Learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 submits that there was a matrimonial dispute, which resulted into the present FIR. He further submits that in the interest of amicable settlement of the matrimonial dispute, the complainant has compromised the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel for the parties jointly seek closure of the criminal proceedings and have referred to the precedent law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Prashant Bhartiya Vs. State of Delhi & Anr. reported on 2021 Cr.L.R. (SC) 1099, which reads as under: "Leave granted. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the materials on record. 3. Respondent No. 2 had lodged a complaint alleging, inter alia, that the appellant had committed an offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, it is undisputed that both the accused (appellant) and respondent No. 2 were living together for a considerable while. The complainant's allegation is that the appellant duped her by misrepresenting to her that he is divorced. The complainant, according to the accused, is not unmarried and her marriage subsists. 4. During pendency of the proceedings, the parties were referred to mediation having regard to the fact that a child was born in the meanwhile (i.e. in the year 2018). As a consequence, a mediated settlement limited to the maintenance and upkeep of the child was arrived at by them. 5. Having regard to these facts and the submissions made on behalf of the complainant-who does not dispute that this may not be an appropriate case for pursuing the prosecution further, this Court is of the considered view that the criminal proceedings must be quashed. 6. In the peculiar circumstances of the present case, the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside; the FIR (No. 616) and all consequent proceedings be quashed. It is, however, made clear that this order will not come in the way or in any manner prejudice the contentions of the parties in any other pending proceedings, which shall be decided in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. Pending application, if any stands disposed of." 4. It is, however, made clear that this order will not come in the way or in any manner prejudice the contentions of the parties in any other pending proceedings, which shall be decided in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. Pending application, if any stands disposed of." 4. Learned counsel for the parties have placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in case of Gian Singh V/s. State of Punjab & Anr. [ (2012) 10 SCC 303 ]. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the factual report, which indicates that the investigating officer has verified the compromise in the physical presence of the complainant. 6. The factual report furnished by learned Public Prosecutor is taken on record. This Court finds that it is admitted by the parties that it was a matrimonial dispute, which they want to resolve. 7. In view of compromise arrived at between the parties and applying the ratio in decision of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (supra) and the precedent law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Prashant Bhartiya's case (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to invoke its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the impugned FIR. 8. In view of the above, the present misc. petitions are allowed and the FIR No.112/2021 registered at Police Station Raniwara, District Jalore along with entire proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed. Stay petitions also stand disposed of accordingly.