[2026:RJ-JP:4843]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7681/2024

1. Shiv Singh S/o Ramkishore, Resident Of Akodiya, Police Station Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur.

2. Dhara Singh S/o Dharm Singh, Resident Of Akodiya, Police Station Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur.

3. Rajmal S/o Dharm Singh, Resident Of Akodiya, Police Station Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur.

4. Dharm Singh S/o Dodiram, Resident Of Akodiya, Police Station Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur.

5. Braham Singh S/o Shrifal, Resident Of Akodiya, Police Station Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur.

6. Ramkishore And Kishore S/o Kadu Kadyaram, Resident Of Akodiya, Police Station Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

2. Bhim Singh S/o Damodar Prasad, R/o Village Akodiya, Police Station Bamanwas, District Sawai Madhopur.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurag Chahar, Advocate &

Mr. Mukeshpal Jadaun, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jaiprakash Tiwari, Public Prosecutor Ms. Manju Chouhan, Advocate &

Mr. Anupam Sharma, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Order

02/02/2026 :

Instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred on behalf of the accused- petitioners with the prayer for quashing the criminal proceedings pending before the Court of ld. Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Gangapur City, in Sessions Case No.45/2013 arising out of F.I.R. No.276/2010 registered at Police Station Bamanwas District Sawaimadhopur for offences punishable under Sections 143, 341,323 &

379 of I.P.C. in terms of compromise.

In the present case, during the trial, the accused-petitioners and the complainant-respondent entered into a compromise and the dispute between them was amicably settled. The parties moved a compromise application through their Advocates before the ld. trial Court seeking verification of compromise in respect of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 325 & 307 of I.P.C. The trial Court, vide its order dated 24.09.2024, while partly allowing the application, verified the compromise qua offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325/149 of I.P.C. but kept the trial pending for the remaining offences i.e. 147, 148 & 307/149 of I.P.C. as those offences are non-compoundable.

Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioners has argued that since the complainant-respondent and the petitioners have already entered into a compromise and on that basis, the petitioners have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 341, 323, 325/149 of I.P.C., there is no possibility of conviction of the petitioners for the remaining alleged offences. It is also argued that as the compromise has been arrived at between the parties by way of mutual consent, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial against the petitioners for the remaining alleged offences and continuation of such proceedings may disturb the compromise reached between them.

Learned Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the respondent raised no objection, if the proceedings qua the remaining alleged offences are dropped against the petitioners, as the parties have already entered into a compromise.

Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case and considering that a compromise has been arrived at between the petitioners & the respondent, this Court finds that there is no possibility of the petitioners being convicted in the cases pending against them before the Court concerned. Further, once the disputes have been settled by way of mutual compromise, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending.

In view of the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another, JT 2012 (9) S.C. 426, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case in which the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners deserves