[2025:RJ-JP:6987] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 599/2025 1. Mohd. Abid son of Chhotu Khan, Aged About 60 Years, Resident of Nahari Ka Naka, Nera Madina Masjid, Police Station Shastri Nagar, Jaipur (Raj). 2. Jakir son of Meer Khan, Aged About 45 Years, Resident of Badiyan Ka Mohalla Dausa, Police Station Kotwali Dausa, District Dausa (Raj). ----Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor 2. Alauddin Ahmed Son of Anwar Khan, Resident of Beliman Mohalla Dausa, Police Station Kotwali Dausa, District Dausa (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishiraj Singh Rathore, P.P. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Goyal, Advocate HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 17/02/2025 Instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been preferred on behalf of the accused- petitioners with the prayer for quashing the criminal proceedings pending against them in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dausa (for short ‘the trial Court’) in connection with Criminal Case No.2899/2021 arising out of F.I.R. No.590/2017 registered at Police Station, Kotwali Dausa District Dausa, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of I.P.C. in terms of compromise. In the present case, during trial, the accused-petitioners and the complainant-respondent No.2 had entered into a compromise and the dispute between them had amicably been settled. On the basis of compromise, the suit came to be decreed by the Court of Additional [2025:RJ-JP:6987] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-599/2025] Senior Civil Judge No.2, Dausa. The parties moved a compromise application before the trial Court for attesting the compromise for the aforesaid offences. The trial Court, vide its order dated 10.01.2025, had attested the compromise & acquitted the accused-petitioners for offence punishable under Section 420 of I.P.C. but kept pending the trial for offence punishable under Section 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of I.P.C. as the same are non-compoundable. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioners has argued that the complainant-respondent No.2 & the petitioners have already entered into a compromise and on the basis of it, the petitioners have been acquitted for the offences punishable under Section 420 of I.P.C., there is no possibility of conviction of the petitioners for the remaining offences. It is further argued 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 petitioners for the remaining offences as the same may derail the compromise arrived at between them. In support of their submissions, learned counsel appearing for the parties, have also placed reliance on the following decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, State of M.P. V/s Laxmi Narayan & Ors. [AIR 2019 SC 1296] & Narinder Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab & Another, 2014 CRLR (SC) 351. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the accused- petitioners, whereas the learned counsel appearing for the complainant/ respondent No.2 has no objection, if the proceedings for the remaining offences are dropped against the petitioners, as the parties have already entered into a compromise. [2025:RJ-JP:6987] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-599/2025] Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case & looking to the fact that since the compromise has been arrived at between the petitioners & the respondent No.2, there is no possibility of the petitioners being convicted in the case pending against them before the Court concerned. Further when once the disputes have been settled by way of mutual compromise, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. 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 petitioners can be quashed while exercising powers under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023. Accordingly, instant petition is allowed. The criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners for the alleged offences in connection with Criminal Case No.2899/2021 arising out of F.I.R. No.590/2017 registered at Police Station, Kotwali Dausa District Dausa, are, hereby, quashed in terms of compromise. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI,J. ASHOK