[2025:RJ-JP:19676] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.1951/2025 1. Mukesh Saini Son Of Shri Suwaram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Village Post Dhoolaravji, Police Station Jamwaramgarh, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur Rural. 2. Smt. Sona Devi Wife Of Shri Mukesh kumar Saini, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Village Post Dhoolaravji, Police Station Jamwaramgarh, Tehsil Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur Rural. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Babulal Saini Son Of Shri Jamnaram Saini, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of R/o Village Post Dhoolaravji, Police Station Jamwaramgarh, Tehsil Jamwramgarh, District Jaipur Rural. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Madhu Meena, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Meena, Adv. For Respondent(s) For Complainant : : Mr. Manvendra Singh, PP Ms. Nidhi Sharma, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 09/05/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the petition under Section 528 of BNSS to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner pending before the concerned Court in FIR No.146/2015, registered at Police Station Jamwaramgarh, District Jaipur Rural for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and the complainant have arrived at compromise and the said compromise was submitted before the concerned Court on 03.03.2022 and was duly verified, therefore, on the basis of compromise, the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner may be quashed. [2025:RJ-JP:19676] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1951/2025] 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the petition and contended that the petitioner filed his nomination, containing forged documents for the post of ‘Sarpanch’. The petitioner was not eligible for election of ‘Sarpanch’ as he was not having requisite qualification. The Investigating Agency after investigation charge-sheeted the petitioner for the commission of offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, therefore considering the above facts, on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties; the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed. 4. Heard and perused the material available on record. 5. It is alleged against the petitioner that he filed his nomination on the basis of forged document otherwise he would not have been eligible to contest the election of ‘Sarpanch’. Therefore on the grounds of compromise entered between the complainant and the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner as the impact of an offence is of larger magnitude. Therefore, the criminal miscellaneous petition for quashing the proceedings is hereby dismissed. 6. It is expected from the learned trial Court to decide the matter expeditiously and make all endeavors to decide the case at the earliest. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the criminal miscellaneous petition stands dismissed along with the stay petition, if any. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J Ashwani Kr Srivastava /-35