[2025:RJ-JP:13406] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1627/2025 Shashi Prakash Chokhani Urf Shashi Agarwal S/o Omprakash Chokhani, Aged About 35 Years, R/o House No. 08, Shyam Mandir Gali, Pankaj Market, Police Station Town (Motijheel), District Mujjafarpur, Bihar, At Present Flat No. 502, Royal Rigaliya, Lalarpura, Vaishali Nagar, Police Station Karni Vihar, District Jaipur West (At Present Central Jail Ajmer). ----Accused-Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Tanmay Agarwal S/o Sunil Agarwal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Bb 1.2 A, Officer Colony, Maya Bazar Ke Pass Ajmer Road, Madanganj Kisanganj, Ajmer, Rajasthan. 3. Nirmal Agarwal S/o Radheyshyam Agarwal, Aged About 53 Years, R/o R/o B B 1.2 A, Officer Colony, Madanganj, Kisangarh, Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Maharshi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, Public Prosecutor Mr. Prashant Dubey, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 25/03/2025 : Instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred on behalf of the accused- petitioner praying therein for quashing impugned F.I.R. No.378/2023 registered at Police Station Madanganj District Ajmer for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 & 471 of I.P.C., alongwith all subsequent proceedings in terms of compromise. Today, the complainants/respondents are present-in-person before this Court, they have been identified by their Counsel & their signatures have been obtained on the order-sheet of the Court. The petitioner is not present as he is in judicial custody. [2025:RJ-JP:13406] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-1627/2025] In the present case, during trial, the accused-petitioner and the complainant-respondents had entered into a compromise & the dispute between them had amicably been settled. The parties moved a compromise application through Advocate before the ld. trial Court for attesting the compromise for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 & 471 of I.P.C. The trial Court, vide its order dated 06.03.2025 had attested the compromise & acquitted the accused- petitioner for offence punishable under Section 420 & 406 of I.P.C. but kept pending the trial for the remaining offences as the same are non- compoundable. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner has argued that since the complainant-respondents & the petitioner have already entered into a compromise and on the basis of it, the petitioner has been acquitted for the offences punishable under Section 406 & 420 of I.P.C., there is no possibility of conviction of the petitioner for the remaining alleged offences. It is also argued that since the compromise has been arrived at between the parties by way of mutual consent, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the trial against the petitioner for the remaining alleged offences as the same may derail the compromise arrived at between them. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the accused- petitioner, whereas the learned counsel appearing for the complainant/ respondents has no objection, if the proceedings qua the remaining alleged offences are dropped against the petitioner, as the parties have already entered into a compromise. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case & looking to the fact that since the compromise has been arrived at between the petitioner & the respondents, there is no possibility of [2025:RJ-JP:13406] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-1627/2025] the petitioner being convicted in the cases pending against him before the Court concerned. Further when once the disputes have been settled by way of mutual compromise, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. Keeping in view 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 it is a fit case, wherein the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner can be quashed while exercising powers under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023. Accordingly, instant petition is allowed in terms of compromise. Impugned F.I.R. No.378/2023 registered at Police Station Madanganj District Ajmer, alongwith all subsequent proceedings are, hereby, quashed qua the present petitioner in terms of aforesaid compromise. The petitioner is said to be in judicial custody. He shall be released from the prison forthwith, if not required in any other case. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J ASHOK