[2025:RJ-JP:29547] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4462/2025 1. Sohil @ Monu Son Of Shri Sabir Khan, Aged About 20 Years, Resident Of Machali Mohalla, Goverdhan Gate, Police Station Mathura Gate, District Bharatpur (Raj). 2. Afjal @ Sonu Son Of Shri Sabir Khan, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Machali Mohalla, Goverdhan Gate, Police Station Mathura Gate, District Bharatpur (Raj). 3. Amar Son Of Umar Khan, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Machali Mohalla, Goverdhan Gate, Police Station Mathura Gate, District Bharatpur (Raj). 4. Nursaba Wife Of Sharukh Khan, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Machali Mohalla, Goverdhan Gate, Police Station Mathura Gate, District Bharatpur (Raj). 5. Abida Wife Of Kamalludin, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Machali Mohalla, Goverdhan Gate, Police Station Mathura Gate, District Bharatpur (Raj). ----Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. 2. Nasimmudin Son Of Yasin Khan, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Machali Mohalla, Goverdhan Gate, Police Station Mathura Gate, district Bharatpur (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Nagayach, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP Mr. Avtar Singh Rathore, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 01/08/2025 1. This petition under Section 528 of BNSS is filed, with a prayer to quash the FIR No.309/2025 registered at Police Station Mathura Gate, Bharatpur for offences under Sections 115(2), [2025:RJ-JP:29547] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-4462/2025] 126(2), 189(2), 303(2) of IPC, on the basis of compromise effectuated between the parties herein, in respect of their inter-se dispute. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that as per directions spelled out in order dated 23.07.2025, the petitioners and complainant have marked their presence before the concerned SHO. It is submitted that parties are relatives as well as neighbours. It is submitted that cross FIRs were made to be registered by the respective sides and now they have entered into a compromise and want to put quietus to the dispute. 3. Heard and considered. 4. At the outset, this Court deems it appropriate to place reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in [2022 (14) SCC 531], relevant portion of which is reproduced below: “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.” 5. In view of the position of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in aforementioned case, and considering the personal nature of dispute, which has been amicably settled between parties, this [2025:RJ-JP:29547] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-4462/2025] Court deems it just and proper to allow the present misc. petition. Compromise is taken on record. 6. Considering the aforementioned, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the FIR No.309/2025 registered at Police Station Mathura Gate, Bharatpur for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 303(2) of IPC with all consequential proceedings, are hereby quashed and set aside. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J CHANDAN /206