Lok Adalats Have No Adjudicatory Power, Cannot Allow Withdrawal of Prosecution Under Section 321 CrPC: Rajasthan High Court

The petitioner was the informant in a 2018 FIR in Jaipur under Sections 323, 341 and 34 IPC over a neighbours’ dispute; the police charge-sheeted the accused under Sections 341 and 323 IPC (para 5). With the case pending before a Metropolitan Magistrate, the Assistant Public Prosecutor applied before the National Lok Adalat to withdraw it under a State Government order of 12.05.2022 (para 4). On 14.05.2022 the Lok Adalat allowed the withdrawal and discharged the two accused (paras 3-4). The petitioner, in person, challenged this under Article 226: a Lok Adalat acts only on compromise, and he had no notice (paras 2, 6); the State relied on Section 321 CrPC and the trivial, compoundable and bailable offences (para 7).

Section 321 CrPC lets the Public Prosecutor or Assistant Public Prosecutor withdraw from a prosecution only with the Court's consent (para 8). Withdrawal is therefore not unilateral: whether the request is fit to be allowed requires application of mind and adjudication, which lies within the Court's domain (para 9). The question was whether a Lok Adalat could exercise the same power under Chapter VI (para 9). Under Sections 19 and 20, a pending case may be referred to a Lok Adalat only if the parties agree or, where one party alone applies, after the other side is heard and the court finds the matter fit for reference (paras 10-11). Sub-sections (3) to (6) of Section 20 require the Lok Adalat to work towards a compromise or settlement; an award can be made only on a compromise, and if none is reached the matter goes back to the court (para 12). The scheme of Chapter VI thus gives Lok Adalats no adjudicatory power; by granting the prosecutor's prayer to withdraw, the Lok Adalat exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it (para 13).