HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6733/2025 Vinish Saini S/o Shri Paramjeet Singh, Aged About 27 Years, R/o 479, Sector 31, Gurgaon City, Haryana. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Sitaram Sharma, R/o 24, Shanti Vihar, Sanganer, Tehsil Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Avtar Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Gupta, PP Mr. Sahil Duseja JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 01/11/2025 1. The present misc. petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No.7086/2025 pending against the petitioner before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan First, Jaipur on the basis of compromise between the parties. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that upon submission of charge-sheet against the petitioner, he is facing trial for the offences under Section 115(2), 126(2) and 281 of BNS, 2023. Counsel submits that during pendency of the trial, an application was submitted by the complainant for compounding the aforesaid offences. Counsel submits that the aforesaid application has been partly allowed and the offences (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6733/2025] punishable under Section 115(2) and 126(2) of the BNS have been compounded, but no permission has been granted to compound the offence under Section 281 BNS, as the same is not compoundable. Counsel submits that the application pertains to personal nature, hence in the light of the judgments passed by the 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 be quashed against the petitioner on the basis of compromise. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed 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, proceedings are quashed against the petitioner. 5. Parties have put appearance in person and they have been duly identified their counsels. 6. In view of the aforesaid compromise and the situations narrated herein above and looking to the fact that the compromise has arrived at between the parties as well as the aforesaid order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the Trial Court and also applying the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to invoke inherent powers of this Court contained under Section 528 BNSS. 7. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands allowed. The proceedings arising out of Criminal Case (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6733/2025] No.7086/2025 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan First, Jaipur are quashed. The petitioner is discharged from the charge under Section 281 BNS. 8. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/36