[2025:RJ-JP:24675] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2725/2025 1. Sudhanshu Choudhary Son Of Shri Ajit Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Bijawari, Tehsil Bhusawar, Distt. Bharatpur (Raj.) 2. Govind Singh Son Of Shri Roop Singh, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Gajipur, Bijawari, District Bharatpur (Raj.) 3. Rohitash Meena Son Of Shri Kirodi Lal Meena, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village Deevli, District Bharatpur (Raj.) 4. Dinesh Singh @ Deva Pahalwan Son Of Shri Parshuram Singh, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Village Pathena, District Bharatpur (Raj.) 5. Surendra Singh S/o Rajendra Singh, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Chhonkarwara Kalan, Bharatpur, Distt. Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Ramkhiladi Son Of Shri Ghanshyam, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Chhonkarwada Kalan, Police Station Khedli Mod, District Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ved Prakash Sogarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.S. Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 04/07/2025 1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition under Section 528 of BNSS, the petitioner has challenged the FIR No. 06/2025 registered at Police Station Khedli Mod, District Bharatpur for committing the offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), [2025:RJ-JP:24675] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-2725/2025] 126(2), 127(2) & 303(2) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that after lodging the FIR, the complainant has entered into compromise with the petitioner stating therein that the FIR was lodged in spur of moment under confusion and mistaken notion of facts, whereas he does not want to prosecute the petitioner. Copy of one application addressed to I.G. Police Range, Bharatpur along with affidavit allegedly executed by the complainant, has also been placed on record as Annx.-2. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the circumstances, where both the parties have settled a dispute outside the Court; and the complainant himself in the compromise states that he does not want to prosecute the petitioner and the FIR was lodged in quite impulsive manner, he may not be dragged in vexatious litigation. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the criminal misc. petition by stating that investigation in respect of impugned FIR is still pending. 5. Under the aforesaid circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice to direct the petitioner to make a representation before the Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur along with all the documents including compromise. On receiving such representation, the Superintendent of Police, Bharatpur is directed to ensure investigation on the representation and documents submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law. [2025:RJ-JP:24675] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-2725/2025] 6. In case, any case is found to be made out against the petitioner, notice of 14 days shall be served upon the petitioner before taking any adverse action against him. 7. In view of the aforesaid directions, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J DIVYA /41