[2025:RJ-JP:50984]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8241/2025

1. Rahul Meena Son of Shri Ramdhan Meena, aged about 20 years, Resident of Budharpura, Tehsil Tunga, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. Vinod Meena Son of Shri Ramesh Meena, aged 18 Years, Resident of Budharpura, Tehsil Tunga, District Jaipur, Ra-

jasthan.

3. Vinod Meena Son of Shri Harsahay Meena, aged 22 Years, Resident of Vimalpura, Post Jhapadakalan, Tehsil Kotkhwada, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

4. Mukesh Meena Son of Shri Kanaram Meena, aged 34, Resident of Budharpura, Tehsil Tunga, District Jaipur, Ra-

jasthan.

5. Dilkhush Meena @ Rohit Meena, Son of Gajanand Meena, aged 22 Years, Resident of Budharpura, Tehsil Tunga, Dis-

trict Jaipur, Rajasthan.

6. Radha Krishna Meena Son of Shri Ramnarayan Meena, aged 43 Years, Resident of Budharpura, Tehsil Tunga, Dis-

trict Jaipur, Rajasthan.

7. Ramesh Meena Son of Shri Ramnarayan Meena, Resident of Budharpura, Tehsil Tunga, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State of Rajasthan, through P.P.

2. Hemraj Meena Son of Ranglala Meena, aged 30 Years, Resident of Budharpura, Tehsil Tunga, District Jaipur, Ra-

jasthan.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sangram Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP with Mr. M.S Shekhawat, PP For Complainant(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order

17/12/2025

1. By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 528 of BNSS, the accused-petitioners have approached this Court with a punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2) & 189(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, (in short ‘BNS’) 2023 on the basis of compromise.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that parties have settled their dispute amicably. It is further submitted that due to compromise, further proceedings in the aforesaid FIR are fruitless.

The written compromise has been annexed with this petition.

3. Complainant and injured are present in person and they have duly been identified by their counsel. Under their instructions, learned counsel for complainant submits that complainant and injured have no objection if the present misc.

petition is allowed.

4. In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties; the material made available for perusal; considering the fact that parties have resolved their dispute amicably 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.

5. In view of the above, this Criminal Misc. Petition is allowed Consequence to follow.

6. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J LALIT MOHAN /152