[2026:RJ-JP:28246] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4110/2022 URN: CRLMP / 6642U / 2022 Om Prakash Jat Son Of Shri Rawatram, Aged About 52 Years, The Then Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Malpura, District Tonk (Raj) At Present Working As Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Kishangarh Rainwal, Ditrict Jaipur (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Suresh Chand Jain Son Of Shri Sobhag Mal Jain, Resident Of Malpura, Police Station Malpura, District Tonk (Raj). ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7008/2021 URN: CRLMP / 12999U / 2021 Suresh Chand Jain S/o Shri Sobhag Mal Jain, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of Malpura, District Tonk. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Deepa Singh for Ms. Manju Joshi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Dhakar, PP Mr. Rajesh Kala JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 22/07/2026 1. In S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.4110/2022, a prayer has been made to quash the impugned FIR No.31/2018, registered with the Police Station Malpura, District Tonk for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 166 and 167 IPC. While in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petiton No.7008/2021 [2026:RJ-JP:28246] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-4110/2022] submitted by the complainant petitioner, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the Investigating Officer for conducting fair and impartial investigation. 2. At the outset, counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant-petitioner submits that a Criminal Misc. Petition No.3836/2022 was submitted by the co-accused Rajnerdra Kumar Jain before this Court for quashing the impugned FIR on the basis of his compromise with the complainant. Counsel submit that the compromise was confined to the co-accused Rajendra Kumar Jain and in light of the compromise between the parities, the FIR qua the co-accused Rajendra Kumar Jain was quashed by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.04.2022. Counsel further submits that the impugned FIR was not quashed qua the petitioner-Om Prakash by this Court. However, the Investigating Agency, without verifying this fact, submitted Final Report (Negative) before the concerned Court and the same was accepted by the learned Magistrate on the same day i.e. on 06.04.2023. Counsel submits that aggrieved by the order dated 06.04.2023, a revision petition has been submitted by the complainant before the Revisional Court. Counsel submits that under the changed circumstances, both the instant criminal misc. petitions have become infructuous. 3. Considering the above factual aspect of the matter, both the instant criminal misc. petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous. 4. The applications and all pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/6-7