[2025:RJ-JP:30530] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4543/2025 Pushpendra Singh S/o Devendra Singh, R/o 121 Susahant City- First Machwa, Kalwad Road, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Smt. Manju Kanwar W/o Pushpendra Singh Ratnawat, D/o Devi Singh, R/o Currently Residing At- 82 A, Jeen Mata Nagar, Harnathpura, Kardhani, Jaipur (West), Rajasthan, India And Permanent Address- 121, Susant City 1 Machwa, Kalwad, Jaipur (West), Rajasthan, India. 3. Devi Singh S/o Jor Singh, R/o- 60, Jeen Mata Nagar, Harnathpura, Jhotwara, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Girriaj Prasad Sharma Ms. Nikita Sharma Ms. Sneha Gulati For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP Mr. Krishna Pratap Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 07/08/2025 1. This misc. petition under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed seeking to quash the FIR No.992/2023 registered at Police Station Kardhani, Jaipur (West) for offences under Sections 323, 341, 427, 452 & 506 IPC qua petitioner, wherein subsequently charges, under Sections 325, 308 and 498-A IPC were added, on the basis of compromise arrived at between both parties. [2025:RJ-JP:30530] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-4543/2025] 2. It has, inter alia, been stated that petitioner and respondent No.2 are husband and wife and the impugned FIR was lodged on accrual of matrimonial acrimony. It has been submitted that matrimonial acrimony accrued between parties has been settled by way of compromise. A written compromise was submitted before the trial Court to drop the criminal proceedings under Sections 323, 341, 427, 452, 506, 325, 308 and 498-A IPC. The trial Court attested and verified the compromise in respect of offences under Sections 323, 325, 341, 427 & 506 IPC only, however in respect of offences under Sections 452, 308 & 498-A IPC, proceedings have not been dropped being non-compoundable offences. The certified copy of the order dated 22.05.2025, passed by the trial Court has been placed on record. 3. It has been submitted that the dispute between parties is private in nature and considering the nature of offence, the entire criminal proceedings may be ordered to be quashed and set aside in view of the settlement arrived at between parties. 4. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jasmair Singh Vs. State of Haryana [(2022) 9 SCC 73], while dealing with the quashment of matrimonial dispute, has held that since parties buried hatchet and decided to give quietus to proceedings which were lodged inter se, hence going by law declared in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303], case was eminently suitable to be considered for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC for quashment of criminal proceedings. 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in another case of Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in [(2022) 14 SCC 531] observed as follows: [2025:RJ-JP:30530] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-4543/2025] “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 personal in nature between parties so also has been amicably settled, therefore, this Court deems it just and proper to allow the present misc. petition. 7. As a final result, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the FIR No.992/2023 registered at Police Station Kardhani, Jaipur (West), alongwith all consequential proceedings qua petitioner, are hereby quashed and set aside. 8. All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J Sachin/108