S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No.2087/2010 Jitendra Meena Vs. The State of Raj. And ors. Dated : 13.12.2010 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI,J. Mr. KA Khan, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Punia, PP for the State. *** By way of this criminal misc. petition, the petitioner has implored to set aside the proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.8, Jaipur City, Jaipur in view of the compromise having taken place for the offences under Sections 427, 428 and 504 of IPC between the parties. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the material on record, it is noticed that one criminal case has been pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.8, Jaipur City, Jaipur wherein the complainant and petitioner filed a compromise for the offences under Sections 427, 428 and 504 of IPC which was duly attested by him. The charge- sheet against the petitioner was filed for the offences under Sections 147, 148 and 149 of IPC also. The learned trial Court did not attest the compound petition for these three offences as they were not compoundable under Section 320 of IPC. -2- Learned counsel for the petitioner also canvassed that the facts emerging on record did not disclose the commission of offences under Sections 147, 148 and 149 of IPC, as such proceedings for these offences deserved to be set aside. This argument is not sustainable for the simple reason that the offences under sections 147 & 148 of IPC are not compoundable under section 320 of Cr.P.C. If no offence under Section 147 & 148 of IPC is found to have been made out or if no offence under Section 147 & 148 of IPC is disclosed from the facts of the case, then such argument can be advanced before the learned trial Court, who is expected to take note of it while deciding the criminal case. But, so far as this Court is concerned, it does not fall within the ambit of Section 482 of Cr.P.C.. It is a settled law that the High Court should exercise the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. sparingly in the rarest of rare cases and that too with circumspection. Merely because the parties have compromised for the offences which are compoundable, the court cannot set aside the proceedings for those offences which are not compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. The prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner seems to be totally illegal. Hence, in view of above and in the light of the judgment pronounced by this Court on 12th March, -3- 2010 in S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.85/2010 (Kishan Lal and ors. Vs. State of Raj. and Anr.) the criminal misc. petition deserves to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. (MAHESH BHAGWATI)J. Pcg item No.23.