DHANNA RAM CHOUDHARY SON OF KALURAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/3839/2025 · 2025-07-11
Sameer Jain
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22860 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22860 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:25758] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3839/2025 Dhanna Ram Choudhary Son Of Kaluram, Aged About 53 Years, R/o B-250 , Ayodhya Nagar , Bhura Patel Marg , Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
2. Station House Officer/io, Police Station Karni Vihar, Jaipur West.
3. Nand Kishore Bhawasar Son Of Bhawani Shankar Bhawasar, R/o 41, Chordiya Petrol Pump Ke Piche, Kamla Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur City (East). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Virendra Singh For State For Complainant : : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP Mr. Virender Godara HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Judgment 11/07/2025
1. Present petitions under Section 528 of BNSS is filed, with a prayer to quash the FIR No. 650/2024 registered at Police Station Karni Vihar District Jaipur (West) for offences under Sections 329(4) of BNS, on the basis of compromise effectuated between the parties herein, in respect of their inter-se dispute.
2.
Learned counsel for both the parties, in presence of their respective clients, have submitted that the dispute at hand is inter-se private in nature, which has been resolved by the parties amicably.
3. Heard and considered.
[2025:RJ-JP:25758] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3839/2025]
4. At the outset, this Court deems it appropriate to place reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in [2022 (14) SCC 531], relevant portion of which is reproduced below:
“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.”
5. In view of the position of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in aforementioned case, and considering the personal nature of dispute, which has been amicably settled between parties, this Court deems it just and proper to allow the present misc. petition. Compromise is taken on record.
6. Considering the aforementioned, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the FIR No. 650/2024 registered at Police Station Karni Vihar District Jaipur (West) with all consequential proceedings, are hereby quashed and set aside.
7. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /272