- (1.) ON the complaint filed by one Gulam Qadar resident of 1 R.K.M. 'A', Tehsil Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gharsana, District Sri Ganganagar (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial court') has taken cognizance against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120B IPC vide order dated 01.04.2009 and has summoned the petitioners through arrest warrant.
(2.) DURING the pendency of the proceedings before the trial court complainant Gulam Qadar died and his legal representatives have pursued the proceedings. On 21.02.2014 a joint application was moved on behalf of the petitioners and the legal representatives of Gulam Qadar before the trial court with a prayer that as the petitioners and the legal representatives of Gulam Qadar have entered into a compromise and resolved their dispute amicably the proceedings pending against the petitioners may be quashed. The trial court has rejected the said application moved on behalf of the petitioners and the legal representatives of Gulam Qadar on the ground that as the petitioners have not been arrested in pursuance of the arrest warrant issued against them vide order dated 01.04.2009, no order is required to be passed on this application and as the offence punishable under Sections 467 and 468 IPC are not compoundable. The petitioners has filed this Criminal Misc. Petition with a prayer that the parties have already entered into a compromise and the petitioners have already paid whole amount to the legal representatives of Gulam Qadar the proceedings pending against them before the trial court may kindly be quashed and set aside. Along with this application affidavits of legal representatives of Gulam Qadar who have been impleaded as respondent No.2/1 to 2/4 in this Criminal Misc. Petition, certifying the compromise has been placed on record. A compromise deed dated 18.02.2014, executed between the petitioners and the respondent Nos.2/1 to 2/4, and certified copy of the joint application moved on behalf of the parties before the trial court has also been placed on record. Mr. Rajendra Soni -Advocate has put in his appearance on behalf of the respondent Nos.2/1 to 2/4 and submitted that the parties have already entered into a compromise and the respondent Nos.2/1 to 2/4 are not interested in continuing the proceedings against the petitioners before the trial court. Mr. Soni has also confirmed execution of the affidavits, compromise deed and the joint application filed by on behalf of the parties before the trial court. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2/1 to 2/4 Mr. Soni further submits that if the proceedings against the petitioners before the trial court are quashed the respondent Nos.2/1 to 2/4 have no objection.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.;