SUNIL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER No.1, Sunil, petitioner No.2, Ramesh, and petitioner No.3, Mukesh Chopra are present in person before this Court. Complainant-non-petitioner, Bholuram Chopra, is also present in person before this Court. Mr. Sunil has submitted his Driving Licence before this Court, and Mr. Bholuram Ram has submitted his Identity Card issued by the Election Commission of India. Mr. Bholuram informs this Court that after he had lodged a F.I.R. against the petitioners, the dispute between him, and the petitioners has been settled outside the Court. Therefore, he no longer wishes to pursue the criminal proceedings pending before the Additional Civil Judge [Junior Division] & Metropolitan Magistrate, No.18, Jaipur Metropolitan City, Jaipur. According to him, on an application filed on the basis of the compromise before the learned Magistrate, while the learned Magistrate has compounded the offence under Section 323 and 341 I.P.C., he has refused to compound the offence under Section 143 I.P.C. Therefore, both the parties pray that on the basis of the compromise, the criminal proceedings should be set aside.

(2.) IN the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another [2012 (9) SCC 427], the Hon'ble Court had answered the reference as under :-

(3.) WITH these observations, this petition is, hereby, allowed.