ATMA RAM GUPTA S/O SHRI LADU RAM JI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/4301/2021 · 2025-11-12
Anand Sharma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37462 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37462 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:45416] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.4301/2021 Atma Ram Gupta S/o Shri Ladu Ram Ji, R/o Flat No. 702, Madhav Vilas, D-70, Madhav Singh Circle, Bani Park, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through P.P.
2. Prateek Goyal S/o Shri Shyam Goyal currently residing at 162, Tatvam Villa, 48, Sona Road, Gurgaon, Sohana, Haryana, India. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Hora Mr. T.C. Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP Mr. Saransh Saini with Mr. Vinod Kumar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA
Order 12/11/2025
1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for seeking direction to quash FIR No.223/2020 registered at Police Station- Bajaj Nagar, District-Jaipur City (East) for offences under Sections 420 & 406 of the IPC.
2. It is submitted that after filing of the instant criminal miscellaneous petition, the complainant as well as accused have entered into compromise and one additional agreement named as 'Final Addendum to the Development Agreement' was executed on
09.01.2025.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was some dispute with regard to commercial
[2025:RJ-JP:45416] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-4301/2021] transactions and after execution of agreement dated 15.01.2025, both the parties have settled their dispute amicably outside the Court. It is also submitted that in view of the compromise, the complainant does not intend to prosecute the petitioner further pursuant to FIR in question.
4. Complainant as well as accused-petitioner are present in person before the Court.
5.
Learned counsel for the complainant along with his counsel have admitted the fact of entering into compromise between the parties and the complainant has categorically stated that he does not want to pursue the impugned FIR against the petitioner.
6. In the light of above, where the basic dispute between the parties was with regard to commercial transactions and the dispute was criminalized by way of filing the impugned FIR, in view of the fact that after filing the petition, parties have entered into compromise in the light of guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, in order to secure ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of law, this Court deems it just and proper to quash and set aside FIR No.223/2020 registered at Police Station-Bajaj Nagar, District-Jaipur City (East) along with all subsequent proceedings.
7. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands disposed of.
(ANAND SHARMA),J DAKSH/39