Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33997 (RAJ)

ADITYA S/O MAHENDRA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/8104/2024 · 2025-02-03

Ganesh Ram Meena

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:4645] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8104/2024 1. Aditya S/o Mahendra, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Rajdhoki, Police Station Tijara, District Khairthal-Tijara. 2. Suman Kumari D/o Rajesh C/o Bijendra Kumar Kala, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Bangotri Khurd, District Jhunjhunu. 3. Shashikant Sharma S/o Shri Vinod Sharma, Aged About 25 Years, R/o 24, Shekhawati Nagar, All Best Children Vidhyalaya, Tonk No. 14, V.k.i. Area, Harmada, Akhaipura, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, through P.P. ----Respondent 2. Harshit Gupta S/o Shri Jagdish Narayan Gupta, Aged About 26 Years, R/o 312, Khuteton Ka Rasta, Kishanpole Bazar, Kotwali, Jaipur. ----Complainant For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mr. Majhar Hussain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, Public Prosecutor Mr. Kuldeep Sharma for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 03/02/2025 1. This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to quash and set aside the FIR No.499/2024 registered at Police Station Ramnagariya, District Jaipur City (East) and all other proceedings arising out thereof. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have compromised in the matter and the compromise deed in this regard has been placed on record (Annexure-2). Counsel further submits that the offences as alleged against the petitioners are [2025:RJ-JP:4645] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-8104/2024] triable by the Magistrate and since the parties have entered into a compromise, no purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings against the petitioners and in view of the compromise, there are now bleak chances of their conviction. 3. This Court vide order dated 03.12.2024 directed the parties to appear before the Investigating Officer for verification of compromise and after verification, the Investigating Officer is directed to submit verification report. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the compromise between the parties has been verified and same has been found to be genuine without under any influence. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant also admits the fact of compromise and under the instructions from the complainant he further submits that the complainant has no objection if the proceedings against that petitioners are quashed and set aside. 6. Considered the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the respective parties. 7. The offences for which the case has been registered against the petitioners are triable by the Magistrate and parties have entered into a compromise and this fact has been verified by the Investigating Officer when the parties were directed to appear for verification of compromise by this Court. 8. Counsel appearing for the complainant has no objection if the proceedings against the petitioner are quashed and set aside. 9. In the facts and circumstances of the case, continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners would be a futile exercise and now there are bleak chances of their conviction. [2025:RJ-JP:4645] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-8104/2024] 10. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems just and proper to exercise the inherent jurisdiction vested under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 11. Accordingly this criminal misc. petition is allowed. The impugned FIR No.499/2024 registered on 06.10.2024 at Police Station Ramnagariya, District Jaipur City (East) along with subsequent proceedings are hereby quashed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Satyendra/135