SAJJAN PANWAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioners with the prayer for quashing the proceedings pending against them before the Additional Civil Judge and Metropolitan Magistrate No.5, Jodhpur Metropolitan (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Case No.22295/2017-State of Rajasthan Vs. Sajjan Panwar (arising out of FIR No.223/2017 of Police Station Mandore, District Jodhpur), whereby the trial court vide order dated 11.01.2018 has attested the compromise for the offences punishable under Section 420 IPC read with Section 66 IT Act but refused to attest the compromise for the offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC as the same is not compoundable.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on a complaint lodged at the instance of respondent No.2, the FIR No.223/2017 was registered at Police Station Mandore, District Jodhpur against the petitioners. After investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC read with Section 66 IT Act in the trial court wherein the trial is pending against the petitioners for the aforesaid offence. During the pendency of the trial, an application was preferred on behalf of the petitioners as well as the respondent No.2 while stating that both the parties have entered into compromise and, therefore, the proceedings pending against the petitioners may be terminated. The trial court vide order dated 11.01.2018 allowed the parties to compound the offences punishable under Section 420 IPC and Section 66 IT Act, however, rejected the application so far as it relates to compounding the offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC.

(3.) The present criminal misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing the said proceedings against them.