[2025:RJ-JP:30077] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1620/2025 1. Dheerendra Pal Singh S/o Shri Pushkar Singh, Resident Of Bhot, Bharatpur ( Rajasthan)- 321303. 2. Ravindra Singh S/o Kunwar Pooran Singh, Resident Of Jaswant Nagar, Bharatpur, Rajasthan- 321001. 3. Brajraj Singh S/o Shri Pooran Singh, Resident Of Bhot House Jaswant Nagar, Bharatpur ( Rajasthan)- 321001 4. Surendra Singh S/o Shri Pal Singh, Resident Of Jaswant Nagar, Bharatpur ( Rajasthan) 321001. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Smt. Pooja Agarwal W/o Shri Sanjeev Agarwal, Resident Of A-120, Ranjeet Nagar, Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP Mr. Harendra Singh Sinsinwar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 05/08/2025 1. Instant criminal misc. petition under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed by petitioners, seeking to quash the FIR No. 60/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Bharatpur for offences under Sections 318(4), 111(2)(a), 119(1), 308(6) and 351(3) of BNS qua petitioners, on the basis of compromise arrived at between parties. 2. It has been pointed out that the contents of FIR itself do not constitute offence under Section 111(2)(a) of BNS and after [2025:RJ-JP:30077] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-1620/2025] investigation in the FIR, Police has found the case under Sections, 119(1), 308(6), 351(3) & 333 of BNS only. 3. It has been submitted that the dispute is private in nature and not a public crime and when the complainant has mutually arrived at a settlement with the accused persons, continuation of criminal proceedings would be a futile exercise and yield no positive result, rather would be in abuse of process of law. 4. A copy of compromise dated 02.08.2025 has been placed on record along with an application (IA No.2/2025). Complainant is present in person, who is duly identified by her counsel and has no objection to quash the FIR and further investigation in the matter. 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab[(2012) 10 SCC 303] observed as follows: “Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between an offender and victim is not the same thing as compounding of offence. They are different and not interchangeable. Strictly speaking, the power of compounding of offences given to a court under Section 320 is materially different from the quashing of criminal proceedings by the High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. In compounding of offences, power of a criminal court is circumscribed by the provisions contained in Section 320 and the court is guided solely and squarely thereby while, on the other hand, the formation of opinion by the High Court for quashing a criminal offence or criminal proceeding or criminal complaint is guided by the material on record as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power although the ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment.” The Hon’ble Supreme Court in another case of Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh [(2022) 14 SCC 531 observed as follows: [2025:RJ-JP:30077] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-1620/2025] “12. The High Court, therefore, having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are non- compoundable.” 6. In view of legal proposition of law laid down by the Apex Court in aforesaid cases, and considering the nature of offence and the dispute which is private in nature between parties as much as has been amicably settled, therefore, this Court deems it just and proper to allow present misc. petition. 7. As a final result, present criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and FIR No. 60/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Bharatpur, with all consequential proceedings, qua petitioners, are hereby quashed and set aside. 8. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J Sachin/160