[2025:RJ-JP:46014] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.7319/2025 Govind Narayan Sharma Son Of Shri Shivkumar Sharma, Resident Of C-G9, Flat No.307, Paradise Residency, Sarojni Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Jitendra Choudhary Son Of Late Shri Vijay Singh, Resident Of 102, Krishna Vihar, Gopalpura Byepass, Mahesh Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Rajni Wife Of Shri Lokendra Singh, Resident Of 102, Krishna Vihar, Gopalpura Byepass, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Ola For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP Mr. Vijay Kumar Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 14/11/2025 1. The present criminal misc. petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS for quashing of the criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.21/2025 pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.06, Jaipur Metropolitan-I in FIR No.244/2022 registered at Police Station Malviya Nagar, Jaipur City (East), 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 Sections 337, 338 & 279 IPC. Learned [2025:RJ-JP:46014] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7319/2025] counsel submits that during pendency of the trial, an application was submitted by the complainant-respondent for compounding the aforesaid offences. Learned counsel submits that the aforesaid application has been partly allowed and the offence punishable under Sections 337 & 338 IPC has been compounded, but no permission has been granted to compound the offences under Section 279 IPC, as the same is not compoundable. Learned counsel submits that in 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 arising out of the impugned FIR 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 arising out of the impugned FIR are quashed against the petitioner. 4. 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 order dated 04.11.2025 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. [2025:RJ-JP:46014] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7319/2025] 5. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands allowed. The proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR No.244/2022 registered at Police Station Malviya Nagar, Jaipur City (East) pending against the petitioner before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.06, Jaipur Metropolitan-I are hereby quashed. The petitioner is discharged from the charges under Section 279 IPC. 6. Stay application as well as all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/110