RAMJI LAL BAIRWA & ANR. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

RAMJI LAL BAIRWA & ANR. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

A third party may have locus standi to challenge, under Article 136, an order quashing an FIR when the quashment raises a real risk of miscarriage of justice and no party (State or victim/relatives) seeks redress; the High Court erred in quashing an FIR under POCSO and IPC offences solely on the basis of a compromise without examining the nature and gravity of the offences, and therefore the High Court order quashing FIR No.6/2022 dated 08.01.2022 and all further proceedings was set aside and the investigation and proceedings ordered to continue in accordance with law.

Parties
Appellants: Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr.; Respondents: State of Rajasthan & Ors.; Amicus Curiae: R. Basant; Intervener: R. H. A. Sikander
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (special Leave Petition Under Article 136) / Judgment on Appeal by the Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Locus Standi of Third Party to Challenge Quashing of FIR, Quashing of Fir/criminal Proceedings Under Section 482 Cr.p.c., Compromise Between Accused and Victim in Criminal Cases, POCSO Act Interpretation, Heinous and Non Private Offences
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Child Protection Law Criminal Procedure Locus Standi of Third Party to Challenge Quashing of FIR Quashing of Fir/criminal Proceedings Under Section 482 Cr.p.c. Compromise Between Accused and Victim in Criminal Cases POCSO Act Interpretation +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramji Lal Bairwa & Anr.

Appellants

State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Respondents

R. Basant

Amicus Curiae

R. H. A. Sikander

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (special Leave Petition Under Article 136) / Judgment on Appeal by the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a third party to a criminal proceeding has locus standi to challenge the order quashing the FIR and all further proceedings pursuant thereto based on a compromise, in a Special Leave Petition under Article 136;
  2. 2 Whether the High Court may quash criminal proceedings or an FIR in respect of heinous and serious offences having serious impact on society merely because the offender and victim or parent(s) of the victim have arrived at a compromise, relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab

Ratio Decidendi

A third party may have locus standi to challenge, under Article 136, an order quashing an FIR when the quashment raises a real risk of miscarriage of justice and no party (State or victim/relatives) seeks redress; the High Court erred in quashing an FIR under POCSO and IPC offences solely on the basis of a compromise without examining the nature and gravity of the offences, and therefore the High Court order quashing FIR No.6/2022 dated 08.01.2022 and all further proceedings was set aside and the investigation and proceedings ordered to continue in accordance with law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned order dated 04.02.2022 of the High Court in S.B. CR. M.P. No.1348/2022 quashing FIR No.6/2022 dated 08.01.2022 and all further proceedings quashed and set aside.
  • FIR No.6/2022, investigation and criminal proceedings pursuant thereto shall proceed against the accused in accordance with law, subject to the nature of the report to be filed under Section 173(2), Cr.P.C.