[2025:RJ-JP:4808] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 230/2025 1. Satish Sharma Son Of Satyanarayan Sharma, Resident Of 60, Shankar Vihar Colony, Goner Road Jamdoli, Agra Road, Jaipur. 2. Rajesh Kumar Sharma Son Of Late Shri Pramnarayan Sharma, Residence Of 143, Babula Belara, Kalan Bharatpur (Raj). 3. Dharma Nayak Son Of Hanuman Nayak, Residentof M-20, Pram Nagar, Jda Colony, Agra Road, Jaipur. 4. Harish Ghai Son Of Shri Ashvain Kumar Ghai, Aged About 70 Years, Residence Of House No. 469/4 Vashishtha Marg, Rajapark. At Present 12A, Sindhi Colony, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Lokesh Kumar Sharma Son Of Late Shri Radheshyam Sharma, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of 7 Kha 24 Sector 7, Jawahar Nagar, Police Thana Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Onkar Singh Rajpurohit, P.P. Mr. Ankush Sharma, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 04/02/2025 : Instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred on behalf of the accused- petitioner praying therein for quashing the impugned F.I.R. bearing No.155/2024 registered at Police Station, Motidoongari, Jaipur City (East) for offences punishable under Sections 115 (2), 126(2), 303(2) & 3 (5) of the B.N.S.S., 2023., in view of compromise arrived at between the parties. [2025:RJ-JP:4808] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-230/2025] Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the factual report dt.03.02.2025, which is taken on record. As per factual report, both the parties have amicably settled their disputes by way of compromise. The Investigating Officer has also verified the factum of compromise arrived between them. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioners submits that the complainant-respondent & the petitioners have already entered into a compromise before the Investigating Officer. It is further submitted that since the compromise has been arrived at between the parties by way of mutual consent, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the trial against the petitioners, as the same may derail the compromise arrived at between them. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the accused- petitioners, whereas the learned counsel appearing for the complainant/ respondent No.2 has no objection, if the impugned F.I.R. is quashed, as the parties have already entered into a compromise. Having considered the overall facts & circumstances of the case & looking to the fact that the compromise has been arrived at between the petitioners & the respondent, this Court is of the view that when once the disputes have been settled by way of mutual compromise, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. Further, keeping in view the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another, JT 2012 (9) S.C. 426, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case, wherein the criminal proceedings pending against the [2025:RJ-JP:4808] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-230/2025] petitioner can be quashed while exercising powers under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023. Accordingly, instant petition is allowed and the impugned F.I.R. No.155/2024 registered at Police Station, Motidoongari, Jaipur City (East) is hereby quashed. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J. Ashok-SAURABH/89