[2025:RJ-JP:3944] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. (Petition) No. 210/2025 Ashok Ratanchandani @ Ashok Kumar Ratanchandani, Son of Shri Chauithram, Aged About 66 Years, Resident of House No. A- 2A Saket Colony, Police Station Adarsh Nagar Jaipur. ----Accused/Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through PP -----Respondent 2. Amit Kumar Phoolwani, Son of Late Shri Parmanand Phoolwani, Resident of Nikhar Sarees, Mn Chambers, Khajane Walon Ka Rasta, Jaipur Presently Residing At 123- Nandpuri, Hawa Sadak, Jaipur. 3. Narendra Kumar Phoolwani Son of Late Mohandas Phoolwani, Resident of Nikhar Sarees, Mn Chambers, Khajane Walon Ka Rasta, Jaipur Presently Residing At 123- Nandpuri, Hawa Sadak, Jaipur. ----Complainant/Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Maneesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP Mr. Vinay Pal Yadav for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 28/01/2025 1. By filing this criminal misc. petition under Section 528 of BNSS, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 16.12.2024 passed by the Court of learned Additional Judicial Magistrate No.8, Jaipur Metropolitan-II in Criminal Case No. 477/2022(53/22) titled as State Vs. Ashok Kumar Ratanchandani and further to quash and set aside the pending criminal case arising our of FIR No.396/2017 registered at Police [2025:RJ-JP:3944] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-210/2025] Station Kotwali, District Jaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 & 120B of IPC and charge-sheeted for offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that a criminal complaint was filed by the complainant in which allegations have been levelled against the accused-petitioner in regard to business money transaction in between both of them. Counsel further submits that both the parties have entered into a compromise which is executed on 15.12.2024 and was submitted before the Court below. Counsel also submits that both the parties admitted the fact of compromise and the same was attested by the trial Court and the accused-petitioner has been acquitted for the offences under Sections 420 & 406 of IPC but the trial Court did not attest the compromise for the offences under Sections 467, 468 & 471 of IPC, in view of the fact that these offences are not compoundable. 3. Counsel further submits that to meet the ends of justice in view of the compromise between the parties, the proceedings of the criminal case may be quashed and set aside and no purpose will be served in further continuing the criminal proceedings. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant on having instructions from the complainant admitted the fact of compromise between the parties. Counsel also submits that complainant has no objection if the criminal proceedings against the accused- petitioner are quashed and set aside. 5. The allegations levelled against the accused-petitioner in the present criminal case are in regard to some dispute of money transactions in between both the parties, i.e. accused-petitioner [2025:RJ-JP:3944] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-210/2025] and complainant and there is no third party interested in the matter. Looking to the compromise between the parties, now it will be futile exercise to continue the proceedings of the criminal case because ultimately there are bleak chances of conviction of the accused-petitioner. 6. Having regard the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and the fact that parties have entered into compromise, this Court to meet the ends of justice, in the interest of parties, deems just and proper to exercise the inherent jurisdiction vested under Section 528 of BNSS. 7. Accordingly, this misc. petition is allowed. The criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.477/2022(53/22) pending before the Court of learned Additional Judicial Magistrate No.8, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, arising our of FIR No.396/2017 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Jaipur for the offences punishable under Section 420, 406 & 120B of IPC are quashed and set aside. 8. Since the main petition has been decided, the stay application and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J DIVYA SAINI /623