After 37 Years, Rajasthan High Court Refuses Retrial Despite Invalid Compromise Of Criminal Case, Quashes Proceedings
The Rajasthan High Court recently upheld the acquittal of a man by the trial court which was based on a compromise agreement, even though the agreement was invalid.
In doing so the court refused to order retrial, noting that remanding the matter for a fresh trial after a lapse of 37 years would not secure the ends of justice.
Despite the acquittal not being in strict consonance with the law, the Court exercised its inherent powers to quash the proceedings against the accused considering that the incident dated back to 1989.
The bench of Justice Farjand Ali was hearing a criminal appeal by the State against order of the Magistrate, passed in 1990, wherein based on a compromise, the accused was acquitted.
It was the case of the State that the one who entered into the compromise was not competent to do so as per Section 320 CrPC, and thus based on such compromise the accused could not have been acquitted.
A complaint was filed by a person against a person alleging killing of goats by the latter. The goats belonged to the brother of the complainant but were grazing on the field of the complainant at the time of the incident.
A compromise was entered into between the complainant and the accused, based on which the acquittal happened.
However, the State argued that since the complainant was not the owner of the goats, he could not have entered into the compromise as per Section 320, CrPC.
After hearing the contention, the Court agreed with the argument put forth by the State, however it was observed that,
“…looking to the fact that the incident took place in the year 1989 and the case is exclusively triable by the Court of a Magistrate which contains punishment which do not extend to five years, remanding the matter back for conducting a fresh trial after a lapse of 37 years, in my view, would not secure the ends of justice.”
The Court held that reopening the matter would not advance the cause of justice, rather just revive a stale controversy and subject the parties to unnecessary hardship and protracted litigation.
In this background, it was held that continuation of the criminal proceedings was totally unwarranted, and the Court was entitled to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to put an end to the matter that would serve justice better.
Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.
Title: State of Rajasthan v Moola Ram
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 104