[2025:RJ-JP:45792] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.4297/2015 1. Shahzad S/o Akhtar Khan Meo, R/o Ghuspethi, Police Station Tauru, Distt. Mewat Haryana. 2. Sabir S/o Sufeda Meo, R/o Chaur Basai, Police Station Kishangarh Bas, Distt. Alwar. ----Accused/Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through P.P. 2. Wasiman W/o Mubin Khan Meo, aged about 28 years, R/o Bisru, Police Station Punhana, at present Guwario Ki Gali, Tapukada, Police Station Tapukada Distt. Alwar. ----Complainant/Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rinesh Gupta Mr. Sarwat Alam Mr. Aayush Goyal Mr. Gaurav Sharma Mr. Ashutosh Naruka Mr. Gorand Agarwal Mr. Saurabh Pratap Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP Mr. Gurvindra Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 13/11/2025 1. By way of filing the present petition, petitioners have challenged the FIR No.176/2009 registered at Police Station- Tapukra, District-Alwar for offences under Section 376/34 of IPC along with all subsequent proceedings. 2. It is submitted that one of the accused implicated in the impugned FIR was a juvenile and was facing trial before the Juvenile Justice Board, Alwar, where the complainant appeared for [2025:RJ-JP:45792] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-4297/2015] her examination and during Court's examination turned hostile and did not support the story of prosecution. 3. It is further submitted that after registration of FIR and during pendency of the instant petition, the complainant has performed marriage with another person and has been living life peacefully. She has also given one affidavit revealing that FIR was lodged under confusion and she did not want to prosecute the petitioners. 4. The complainant-prosecutrix was present before this Court on 06.11.2025 and showed her intention to give statements to support the compromise entered into between her and the accused-petitioners. Accordingly, this Court directed the Registrar (Judicial) to record her statements. 5. In the light of directions given by this Court, the complainant-prosecutrix appeared before the Registrar (Judicial) and gave following statements: "eSa 2009 esa ViwdM+k ftyk vyoj esa jtkd ds edku esa fdjk, ij jgrh Fkh edku ekfyd ls fdjk, ds ekeys esa fookn gks tkus ds dkj.k eSaus muds nks fj'rsnkj 'kgtkn iq= v[rj [kku ,oa 'kkfcj iq= lQsnk eso ds fo:) ViwdM+k Fkkus esa ,QvkbZvkj uacj 176@2009 ntZ djkbZ FkhA mDr ,QvkbZvkj eSaus yksxksa ds cgdkos esa vkdj ,oa vkos'k esa vkdj ntZ djkbZ FkhA eSa mDr ,QvkbZvkj esa 'kgtkn o 'kkfcj ds fo:) dksbZ dkuwuh dkjZokbZ ugha pkgrh vkSj u gh bl izdj.k dks vkxs pykuk pkgrhA eq>s vkSj dqN ugha dguk gSA" 6. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that there was a dispute of rental premises between the petitioners and the complainant, however, in quite impulsive manner the FIR was [2025:RJ-JP:45792] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-4297/2015] lodged by the complainant, whereas no such incident as alleged in the FIR has taken place. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madhukar & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1415, where in the cases relating to Section 376 of IPC in the event of compromise entered into between the parties, it was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that in the light of compromise, there were no chances of the accused to be convicted pursuant to trial in furtherance of FIR and High Court in exercise of its powers under 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the FIR. 8. Similar view has been taken by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in order dated 26.05.2022 passed in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.4487/2022 (Ravindra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.) and order dated 20.10.2023 passed in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.6648/2023 (Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.). 9. In the light of above and looking to the affidavit given by the complainant-prosecutrix, which is duly supported by the statements given by her before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, there appears to be no possibility of conviction of the petitioners, in case, they are permitted to be prosecuted pursuant to impugned FIR, hence, forcing the petitioners to face further trial in the instant matter would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, in order to secure ends of justice, this Court deems it just and proper to quash and set aside FIR No.176/2009 registered at Police Station-Tapukra, District-Alwar for offences [2025:RJ-JP:45792] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-4297/2015] under Section 376/34 of IPC along with all subsequent proceedings. Petitioners are discharged from all the allegations levelled against them. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed. 11. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J DAKSH/64