##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 58/2020

Rameshwar Sharma S/o Jagannath, aged about 41 Years, R/o Papali Ki Dhani, Jawahar Circle, Jaipur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State of Rajasthan, through PP.

2. Jabbar Mal Chindaliya S/o Shri Chandan Mal, Partners Sujas Developers L.L.P.S. 1, Mayur Tower, Neharu Bazar,

Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.S.L. Kumawat For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vivek Choudhary, PP

Mr.Adeet Srivastava for Mr.Sanjay Srivastava

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

30/03/2026

1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for quashing of the impugned F.I.R. No.1022/2014, registered with the Police Station Jawahar Circle, District Jaipur (East) for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 388, 389 & 120-B of IPC on the basis of the compromise dated

09.11.2015 arrived at between the parties.

2. The parties have put in appearance in-person and complainant accepts the factum of compromise being arrived at between the parties and he no objection in case, the proceedings pending before the trial Court are quashed and he does not wish

to prosecute the petitioner.

(Uploaded on 10/04/2026 at 10:51:45 AM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 05:53:30 PM)

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-58/2020]

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Div.)-cum-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan vide order dated 02.08.2019 accepted the application in part and compounded the offence under Sections 420 & 406 IPC, but permission has been declined for rest of the offences, i.e., Sections 388, 389 & 120-B IPC as these offences are not compoundable. Counsel submits that the dispute between the parties is personal in nature and on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the pending

proceedings may be quashed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 and in the case of The State of Madhya Pradesh vs.

Laxmi Narayan reported in 2019 (5) SCC 688

5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the arguments raised by

counsel for the petitioner.

6. In view of the aforesaid compromise, looking to the allegations which are personal in nature and also applying the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of Gian Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to invoke inherent jurisdiction of this Court contained, under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and orders to compound the remaining

offences, i.e., offences under Sections 388, 389 & 120-B IPC.

7. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands allowed. The petitioner is discharged from the charge under Sections 388, 389 & 120-B IPC. The proceedings of impugned F.I.R. No.1022/2014, registered with the Police Station Jawahar

(Uploaded on 10/04/2026 at 10:51:45 AM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 05:53:30 PM)

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-58/2020]

Circle, District Jaipur (East) against the petitioners stand quashed

and set-aside.

8. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, stand

disposed of.

9. The parties have been duly identified by their respective

counsels.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

Aayush Sharma /113

(Uploaded on 10/04/2026 at 10:51:45 AM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 05:53:30 PM)