P.K. Lohra, J. - (1.) This criminal misc. petition is filed by accused-petitioners for annulment of FIR No.201/2016, registered at Raas Police Station, District Pali, and further investigation/proceedings pursuant thereto. In the impugned FIR, second respondent-complainant has charged the petitioners for offence punishable under Sections 143, 323, 452 and 307 IPC.
(2.) The facts apposite for the purpose of this petition are that second respondent-complainant submitted a written report at Raas Police Station, District Pali on 1st of November 2016 with a specific allegation that in the morning of 29th of November 2016 accused-petitioners armed with lathis came to his residence and assaulted him as well as his wife, brother and mother. In the report, specific role is attributed to the accused persons for causing serious injury on the head of the complainant. Taking note of the allegations contained in the report, the same is registered as aforesaid FIR under Sections 143, 323, 452 and 307 IPC. It is also averred in the petition that when investigation in the matter was going on, good senses prevailed over the complainant as well as accused-petitioners to settle the matter perpetually. As per the version of petitioners, essentially there was a trivial dispute pertaining to some adjacent immovable property between the family of complainant and the petitioners, who are related to each other, which took an ugly turn culminating into the alleged incident resulting in impugned FIR. The petition further unfurls that good counseling of some of the relatives persuaded both the parties to give a decent burial to the dispute and enter into a compromise. Finally, a written compromise is arrived at between the rival parties and the second respondentcomplainant addressed a letter dated 4th of March 2017 to the SHO concerned alongwith written compromise on non-judicial stamp paper. The compromise is signed by the second respondent-complainant as well as accused-petitioners. In proof thereof, the application submitted before the Investigating Officer as well as written compromise is also placed on record.
(3.) Learned counsel for the accused-petitioners submits that petitioners are charged for offence punishable under Sections 143, 323, 452, 307 IPC but now in view of changed circumstances when the parties have sorted out their dispute and written compromise has been arrived at, which is on record, the impugned FIR be quashed and further investigation pursuant thereto be clogged perpetually. It is also argued by learned counsel that while it is true that offence under Section 452 IPC is not compoundable being a serious offence and the offence under Section 307 IPC which is a more graver offence too is not compoundable, but then in the backdrop of peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case, it is desirable to exercise inherent powers for quashment of impugned FIR and entire proceedings pursuant thereto. Learned counsel would contend that essentially there was a trivial dispute between the rival parties, who are near relatives, and now as both the parties have settled their dispute perpetually and want to live in peace as friendly neighbours, it would be just and appropriate to exercise inherent powers to pave way for their bona fide pursuit. In support of his submissions, learned counsel has placed reliance on following legal precedents: (1) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr, 2012 CrLR 883 (2) Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr, 2014 CrLR 351 (3) Meghraj Vyas & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [Criminal Misc. (Pet.) (Crlmp) No.2571 of 2016, decided on 05.10.2016] (4) Pradeep Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [Criminal Misc. (Pet.) (Crlmp) No.2458 of 2016, decided on 09.09.2016].;