HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J.
Ganesh Narayan Yadav, S/o. Nanuram Yadav - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6018 of 2025
Decided On : 06-03-2026
Order :
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J.
1. Parties are present in person and they have been duly identified by their respective counsel.
2. By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS, the accused-petitioner has approached this Court with a Muhana, District Jaipur City (South) for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC along with all the subsequent proceedings arising out thereof.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that perusal of the FIR would reveal that the dispute between the parties is purely of civil and personal nature. Counsel submits that during pendency of the investigation, the petitioner has entered into a compromise with the complainant and the complainant does not want to pursue the impugned FIR. It is submitted that now, parties have settled their dispute amicably. It is submitted that due to compromise, further proceedings in the aforesaid FIR are fruitless. The written compromise has been annexed with this petition. It is further submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant does not dispute the factum of compromise.
5. In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties; the material made available for perusal; considering the facts that parties have resolved their dispute amicably and there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and also finding that the present case is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr-reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC 604] and as such, the aforesaid FIR is liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties.
6. In view of the above, this Criminal Misc. Petition is allowed District Jaipur City (South) along with all the subsequent proceedings arising out thereof, is quashed and set aside. Consequence to follow.
7. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that FIRs can be quashed based on compromises between the parties, in line with the principles of law established by the Supreme Court.
The inherent power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings based on compromises when the likelihood of conviction is minimal and justice favors dismissal.
The court established that FIRs can be quashed when a compromise is reached between the parties, invoking inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The court established that compromises between parties can lead to the quashing of FIRs under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when both parties agree not to pursue the matter.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.