In the matter of Shyam Bacchani Vs. State Of Rajasthan, the High Court of Rajashtan held that the Lok Adalat does not have any adjudicatory power. The bench quashed the decision of the Lok Adalat giving Permission to the Public Prosecutor to withdraw prosecution and ordered the restoration of the criminal matter, granting the parties the liberty to proceed according to law before a competent Court.

The Matter came into the frame when the party challenged Lok Adalat by questioning whether the Lok Adalats under Chapter VI of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 have adjudicatory power or are required to pass awards only on a consensus between the parties.

Case Brief:

The Bench of the Lok Adalat, Jaipur had allowed the Assistant Public Prosecutor to withdraw the criminal prosecution arising out of an FIR and thereby discharged the accused from offences under Sections 323 and 341 of IPC. The Petitioner was an informant of the same FIR, which disclosed a dispute between the two neighbours, after the investigation of which, the Police submitted a charge sheet for an offence under Sections 341 and 323 of IPC.

The counsel member for the Petitioner submitted before the court that the Lok Adalat can dispose of the cases only on a compromise between the parties. On the Contrary, Counsel appearing for the Respondents argued that under Section 321 of CrPC, the Public Prosecutor was competent to withdraw criminal prosecution especially considering the trivial nature of the offences alleged, which is compoundable and bailable.

“A bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions makes it abundantly clear that when a case, pending before the Court (as in the present case) is referred to the Lok Adalat, the parties thereof must agree for reference. If one of the parties only makes an application to the Court for such reference, other parties must have an opportunity of hearing beforehand for reaching at conclusion by the Court that the matter is fit one to be referred to the Lok Adalat." Said Court 

The court then held, “A perusal of the entire scheme under Chapter VI (supra) as well as the referred provisions aforesaid would make it clear that the Lok Adalats have no adjudicatory power and by allowing the prayer of learned Public Prosecutor to withdraw prosecution, the Lok Adalat has exercised adjudicatory jurisdiction which is not vested in it. In the result, the impugned order passed by the Lok Adalat is hereby quashed and this Writ Petition is allowed.”