Hanuman Kharwal @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors

By this common order, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5633/2018 preferred by Hanuman Kharwal and fifteen others against State of

Rajasthan & Lalita Devi, along with S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5634/2018 instituted by Goapl & ten others against State of Rajasthan

& Babu Lal Kharwal, shall be decided together.

Petitioners and complainant to both the petitions are residents of two adjoining Villages viz., Ramsar Chatriwali Dhani, Chak Rojwadi and Village

Chak Rojwadi respectively.

On 11.07.2018 at around 06:30 P.M. an occurrence had ensued and both the sides lodged separate F.I.Rs. containing version and cross-version.

F.I.R. No.147 dated 12.07.2018 was lodged by Smt. Lalita Devi, complainant/respondent No.2 to S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition)

No.5633/2018, wherein she has stated that in all sixteen accused constituted unlawful assembly, they came to her house, dragged her father-in-law,

named Gopal and gave him injuries. They also committed obscene act with the complainant â€" Smt. Lalita Devi.

Smt. Lalita Devi, complainant/respondent No.2 to S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5633/2018 is present in person before this Court. She has

been identified by her Counsel Mr. Attar Singh Gurjar.

Smt. Lalita Devi present in person, has stated that one of the accused had pulled her ‘saree’.

Another case/F.I.R. bearing No.155/2018, which contains cross version was lodged by Babu Lal Kharwal.

In the said F.I.R., it is stated that the accused came armed and caused injuries. The chain of Saroj wife of Suresh was snatched.

In both the petitions containing version and cross-version, a compromise has been filed.

The accused-petitioners to both F.I.Rs., complainant to both F.I.Rs. and injured are present in person before this Court. They have been identified by

their respective Counsel â€" Mr. Manish Sharma and Mr. Attar Singh Gurjar.

The learned counsel appearing for the parties have vouchsafed the factum of compromise affected between the parties.

Counsel appearing for the parties have contended that since all accused to both the petitions and the complainant are living in the same vicinity, on the

intervention of the respectables and elders in order to promote everlasting peace, amity and harmony, a compromise has been affected between the

parties.

I find merit in the joint submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties that no offence punishable under Section 354 I.P.C. is made out.

In the present case, one of the accused in a melee being member of the mob when injuries were being caused pulled saree of the lady during the

course of scuffle. From above, it cannot be said that the intention of the accused was to outrage the modesty of the woman.

Considering the fact that on the spur of the moment and over a trivial matter pertaining to property dispute without any premeditation, occurrence has

taken place, this Court is of the view that compromise affected between the parties can be accepted.

Counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that dispute, which is essentially private in nature stands resolved.

Counsel appearing for the petitioners has prayed that since the dispute has been amicably resolved, the criminal case pending between the parties as

well as impugned F.I.Rs. be quashed.

It has been often held by the Courts that hour of the compromise is the finest hour between the parties and the Court while exercising its inherent

jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceedings even qua non-compoundable offences.

Relying upon the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another [(2012) 10 S.C.C. 303], learned counsel for the petitioners has pleaded that this

Court while exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. ought to quash the criminal proceedings, which have been amicably resolved.

Considering the fact that parties have amicably resolved their dispute, the principle established by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh [supra]

and in the interest of justice, this Court, hereby, quashes impugned F.I.R. No.147/2018 dated 12.07.2018 registered at Police Station Tunga District

Jaipur City (East) for offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354 and 451 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 (1) (10) of the

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and F.I.R. No.155/2018 dated 19.07.2018 registered at same Police

Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 341, 354 and 451 I.P.C., along with all subsequent proceedings.

Resultantly, both the petitions are allowed.

Let a copy of this order be placed in the connected petition.