HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4379/2025 1. Jaipal Singh S/o Harvansh Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 11/32, C/19B Sita Nagar, Police Station Atmaddola District Agra Utterpradesh. 2. Bhupendra Singh S/o Harvansh Singh, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 11/32, C/19B Sita Nagar, Police Station Atmaddola District Agra Utterpradesh. 3. Asha W/o Harvansh Singh, Aged About 58 Years, R/o 11/32, C/19B Sita Nagar, Police Station Atmaddola District Agra Utterpradesh. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Neelam W/o Jaipal Singh, D/o Jaipal Singh, R/o Halena Police Tehsil Weir District Bharatpur ( Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.C.Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Gupta-PP Mr. Tanay Jareda JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 30/10/2025 1. By way of filing this criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case No.269/2018 arising out of FIR No.187/2017 registered with Police Station-Halena, District Bharatpur for the offence(s) under Sections 323, 498-A and 406 IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were facing trial for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 323, 341, 498-A and 406 IPC. After completion of trial, (2 of 3) [CRLMP-4379/2025] the trial Court vide its judgment dated 06.09.2022 convicted the petitioners for the offence under Section 498-A IPC but they were acquitted from the rest of the charges. Counsel for the petitioners submits that aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of conviction, an appeal No.75/2022 was preferred by the petitioners before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Weir (Bharatpur), wherein a compromise has been taken place in between the parties and on the basis of the same, an application was submitted for compounding the offence, but the Appellate Court vide judgment dated 16.05.2025 has refused to compound the same, as the offence under Section 498-A is not compoundable. Learned counsel further submits that the now all the alimony amount has been paid to the complainant and the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the petitioners. 3. Complainant has put in appearance in person and she has been duly verified by her counsel and she admits the factum of compromise and submits that in case, the proceedings arising out of criminal case is quashed, she has no objection. 4. In view of the aforesaid compromise arrived at between the parties and looking to the fact that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and now the complainant does not want to prosecute the petitioners and also applying the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases 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, this Court deems it just and proper to invoke inherent powers of this Court contained under Section 528 BNSS. (3 of 3) [CRLMP-4379/2025] 5. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands allowed and the criminal proceedings arising out of the criminal case No.269/2018 and the judgment dated 06.09.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Weir Bharatpur stand quashed and set-aside. The petitioners are discharged from the charge under Section 498-A IPC. 6. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/153