HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.7056/2025 Sohni Devi W/o Shri Raghunath, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Bandarsindri, P.s. Bandarsindri, District Ajmer. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Bajrang Lal S/o Shri Lakshminarayan, Aged About 67 Years, R/o Village Bandarsindri, P.s. Bandarsindri, District Ajmer. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akshat Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Mr. Aditya Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 03/11/2025 1. The present criminal misc. petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS for quashing the proceedings of the Criminal Case No.424/2018 CIS No./CRC/66/2019 pending against the petitioner before the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Kishangarh, District Ajmer, on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that upon submission of the charge-sheet against the petitioner, he is facing trial for the offences under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 199 & 200 IPC. Learned counsel submits that during pendency of the trial, an application was submitted by the complainant-respondent for (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7056/2025] compounding the aforesaid offences. Learned counsel submits that the aforesaid application has been partly allowed and the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC has been compounded, but no permission has been granted to compound the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471, 199 and 200 IPC, as the same are not compoundable. Learned counsel submits that in the light of the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 and The State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan reported in 2019 (5) SCC 688, the proceedings be quashed against the petitioner on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer, but counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant supported the arguments of counsel for the petitioner and does not dispute the factum of compromise between the parties and submits that the complainant has no objection in case, the proceedings are quashed against the petitioner. 4. Complainant-respondent has put appearance in person and he has been duly identified by his counsel. 5. In view of the aforesaid compromise and the situations narrated herein above and looking to the fact that the compromise has been arrived at between the parties as well as considering the aforesaid order dated 07.10.2025 passed by the Trial Court and also applying the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to invoke the inherent powers of this Court contained under Section 528 BNSS. (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7056/2025] 6. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands allowed. The proceedings arising out of the Criminal Case No. 424/2018 CIS No./CRC/66/2019 pending against the petitioner before the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Kishangarh, District Ajmer are hereby quashed. The petitioner is discharged from the charges under Sections 467, 468, 471, 199 and 200 IPC. 7. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/60