[2025:RJ-JP:38288] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 603/2018 Sagar Yadav S/o Shri Bhanwarlal Yadav, R/o Bhantatiyo Ka Mohalla, Village Rundal, Police Station-Chandwaji, District-Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan Through PP 2. Shri Sunil Kumar Garg S/o Shri Omprakash Garg, aged about 28 years, R/o Plot No. 38, Rajpooto Ka Mohalla, Village Roondal, Tehsil-Aamer, Police Station Aamer, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Adv. with Mr. Krishan Kumar Yadav, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishiraj Singh Rathore, Dy. G.A. Mr. Devi Singh, Dy. G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR Order 18/09/2025 1. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash and set aside the order dated 10.01.2018 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.31, Jaipur Metrocity, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'learned trial Court') in Case No.1487/2017 titled as State Vs. Sagar Yadav and criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner arising out of FIR No.378/2017 registered at Police Station Murlipura, District Jaipur (West) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC, mainly on the ground that the parties [2025:RJ-JP:38288] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-603/2018] have entered into compromise and amicably settled their dispute and now no dispute remains between them. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge-sheet against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC was submitted before the learned trial Court. During trial, complainant/respondent No.2 and petitioner has arrived at compromise and settled their dispute amicably and both the parties submitted a compromise deed along with an application to attest the compromise. Learned trial Court after giving due permission partly allowed the application vide order dated 10.01.2018, attested the compromise for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 IPC as the same are compoundable. However, learned trial Court refused to attest the compromise for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, as these offences are non-compoundable. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that as the parties have arrived at compromise and settled their dispute amicably, therefore, the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.378/2017 pending against the petitioner before the learned trial Court are liable to be quashed and set aside on the basis of compromise. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that now the case has been transferred from the learned trial Court and is now pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan-II bearing CIS No.45242/2017. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record. [2025:RJ-JP:38288] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-603/2018] 6. In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and also the material made available for my perusal, this Court feels that in order to establish peace and harmony between the petitioner and the complainant/ respondent no.2 and give quietus to the litigation, it would be expedient to quash the criminal proceedings pending in the matter. 7. The present case is 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 Bhajan Lal & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC 604], the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties although the offences are non-compoundable. 8. In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.378/2017 registered at Police Station Murlipura, District Jaipur (West) pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.5, Jaipur Metropolitan-II are quashed and set aside on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. Consequence to follow. 9. The stay application also stands disposed of. (ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J Mohita/35