[2025:RJ-JP:3951] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 617/2023 Ashish Gurjar @ Neeru S/o Hari Singh Gurjar, R/o Bhojpura, Purani Ka Bass Kailai District Dausa. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, through PP 2. Yogesh Kumar Bairwa S/o Roopnarayan Bairwa, R/o Dhani Kalarama, Khanpur, Sikandra District Dausa. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Adv. P.C. Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP Mr. Meghraj Meena, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 28/01/2025 1. This criminal misc. petition is filed by the accused petitioner with a prayer to quash and set aside the proceedings of First Information Report (FIR) No. 586/2022 dated 07.11.2022, registered at police station Sikandra, District Dausa for offences punishable u/S 143, 323, 341, 504, 506, 382 IPC and Section 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner submits that the FIR was lodged with a delay of 20 days. He further submits that the complainant are three brothers and all the three brothers have lodged separate criminal cases against the accused petitioner and other persons. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner further submits that two of the brothers have entered into compromise with the accused in the cases filed by them and in such [2025:RJ-JP:3951] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-617/2023] circumstances, the criminal case lodged against the accused petitioner be quashed and set aside. He further submits that during investigation, the police has also come out the conclusion that these three brothers are in habit of lodging criminal cases and then entering into compromise. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has placed on record the factual report with regard to the investigation of the criminal case and submits that after due investigation in the matter, the police has found the allegations proved against the present accused petitioner. 4. Considered the submissions made at bar and perused the factual report as well as the case diary. 5. The first argument of learned counsel for the accused petitioner is that FIR was lodged with a delay of 20 days. In view of this Court, the delay in lodging the FIR cannot be a ground for quashing the FIR. 6. Learned counsel for the accused petitioner has also raised an issue that the complainant, who are the three brothers, are in habit of lodging criminal case against the persons and then entering into compromise. He has also stated that in two other criminal cases lodged by the brother of the complainant, they have entered into compromise, and in such circumstances, the present case deserves to be quashed and set aside. 7. On perusal of the averments made in the FIR, this Court finds that at this stage it cannot be said that the allegations against the accused petitioner are false and fabricated. As per the factual report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, the [2025:RJ-JP:3951] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-617/2023] police, after investigation, has found the allegations proved against the accused petitioner. 8. The compromise by the brothers of the complainant in other criminal cases cannot be a ground for quashing the FIR against the present accused petitioner. 9. Hence, this Court finds no ground to interfere in the matter. 10. Accordingly, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed. 11. Stay application also stands dismissed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J GAURAV SRIVASTAVA /633