[2025:RJ-JP:2520] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7425/2024 1. Sher Mohammad Son Of Munshi, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 2. Sajid Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 3. Aashik Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 4. Arsad Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 5. Akhtar Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 6. Talim Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 7. Vaseem Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 8. Moen Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 9. Missi W/o Arsad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 10. Rahishan W/o Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) ----Accused/Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent 2. Asloop Son Of Sufeda, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) ----Complainant/Respondent 3. Sanjida D/o Asloop, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 4. Nasir Son Of Asloop, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) ----Victim/Respondents Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7404/2024 1. Nasir Son Of Asloop, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 2. Sakir Son Of Asloop, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 3. Irfan Son Of Asloop, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) [2025:RJ-JP:2520] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-7425/2024] 4. Asloop Son Of Sufeda, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) ----Accused/Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent 2. Akhtar Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) ----Complainant/Respondent 3. Arsad Son Of Sher Mohammad, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) 4. Miskina W/o Arsad Mev, Resident Of Haivatka, Gopalgarh, District Deeg (Raj.) ----Victim/Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshul Sharma, Adv. for Mr. Arvind Sharma, Adv. (for respondent in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7404/2024) Mr. Ankit Khandelwal, Adv. (for petitioners in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7404/2024) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishiraj Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 17/01/2025 1. By way of these criminal misc. petitions under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 the accused-petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR No.124/2024 registered at Police Station Gopalgarh, District Deeg for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 74 & 303(2) of BNS, 2023 and FIR No.127/2024 registered at Police Station Gopalgarh, District Deeg for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), [2025:RJ-JP:2520] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-7425/2024] 74 & 303(2) of BNS, 2023 on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. Mr. Ankit Khandelwal, learned counsel appears on behalf of the complainant-respondent in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7425/2024. 3. Learned counsel for both the parties jointly submit that the parties have settled their dispute amicably. 4. On 09.12.2024, parties were directed to appear before the Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer was directed to verify the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties and to submit its report. Compromise deed has already been annexed with the petitions. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the verification report dated 18.12.2024 forwarded by Station House Officer, Gopalgargh, District Deeg, in which it has been mentioned that both the parties have settled their dispute and both the parties do not want to proceed with the criminal cases initiated by them against each other. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. In view of the aforesaid and considering the fact that the parties have settled their dispute and a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and also considering that the present cases are wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary [2025:RJ-JP:2520] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-7425/2024] Bhajan Lal & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC 604], the FIRs are liable to be quashed, although, the offences are non-compoundable. 8. In view of the above, both the criminal misc. petitions are allowed and FIR Nos.124/2024 & 127/2024 registered at Police Station Gopalgarh, District Deeg are quashed and set aside on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. Consequence to follow. 9. The stay applications also stand disposed of. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J Mohita /127-128