[2025:RJ-JP:9128] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 343/2025 Azar Khan Pathan Son of Aman Khan, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Near Jama Masjid, Village Gagwana, Tehsil And District Ajmer. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Vishal Varma Son of Mohan Lal, R/o Hotel Helimax, Gegal, Ajmer (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajiya-Ur-Rahman, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapesh Agarwal, Public Prosecutor Mr. Mohammad Zubeir, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 03/03/2025 : Instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred on behalf of the accused- petitioner seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in a case arising out of impugned F.I.R. No.64/2024 registered at Police Station, Gegal District Ajmer for offences punishable under Sections 143, 341, 323, 440 & 379 of I.P.C. & under Sections 3(1)(r), 3 (1) (s) & 3 (2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in terms of compromise. In compliance of the order dt.21.01.2025 passed by this Court, learned Public Prosecutor for the State, has submitted the factual report, which is taken on record. As per factual report, both the parties have amicably settled their disputes by way of compromise. The Investigating Officer has also verified the factum of compromise arrived between the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner submits that the complainant-respondent & the petitioner have already [2025:RJ-JP:9128] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-343/2025] entered into a compromise before the Investigating Officer. It is further submitted that since the compromise has been arrived at between the parties by way of mutual consent, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the trial against the petitioner, as the same may derail the compromise arrived at between them. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the accused- petitioner, whereas the learned counsel appearing for the complainant/ respondent has no objection, if the impugned F.I.R. is quashed, as the parties have already entered into a compromise. Having considered the overall facts & circumstances of the case & looking to the fact that the compromise has been arrived at between the petitioner & the respondent, this Court is of the view that when once the disputes have been settled by way of mutual compromise, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. Furthermore, keeping in view the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another, JT 2012 (9) S.C. 426, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case, wherein the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner can be quashed while exercising powers under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023. Accordingly, instant petition is allowed. The impugned F.I.R. No.64/2024 registered at Police Station, Gegal District Ajmer, alongwith all subsequent proceedings is, hereby, quashed qua the present petitioner in terms of compromise. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J. ASHOK /