[2026:RJ-JP:2795] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 344/2026 1. Fariyad S/o Ajij, 2. Saddam S/o Rahimuddin, 3. Mukim S/o Habib, 4. Jakir S/o Habib, All R/o Village Berkhandi, Malarna Doongar, Batoda, District Sawai Madhopur ( Rajasthan). ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP 2. Shakir S/o Ali Hussain, 3. Ali Hussain S/o Idaya, 4. Mosina W/o Aarif, All R/o Village Berkhandi, Bamanwas, Batoda, District Sawai Madhopur (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Paliwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 21/01/2026 1. The instant misc. petition under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed for quashing of entire criminal proceedings pending before learned Additional Session Judge No.2, Gangapur City, Sawai Madhopur in Session Case No.171/2021 (31/2018) arising out of FIR No.96/2018 registered at Police Station Batoda, District Sawai Madhopur for offences punishable under Sections 147, 323, 341 & 504 of IPC. 2. After registration of the aforesaid FIR, the police conducted investigation in the matter and submitted charge-sheet before the concerned court against the petitioners. [2026:RJ-JP:2795] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-344/2026] 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that parties have entered into a compromise in the spirit of Lok Adalat. It is submitted that both the parties are from same family. It is submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners. It is submitted that during trial, both parties filed an application for attesting the compromise for offence under Sections 341, 323, 325 & 504/34 of IPC before learned trial court and vide order dated 17.03.2025, learned trial court verified the compromise for the aforesaid offences, but the trial is still pending against the petitioners for offence under Section 307/34 of IPC. Learned counsel contends that in cross case, proceedings have already been quashed by learned trial court on the basis of compromise. It is, thus, prayed that the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners may be quashed. 4. Learned State counsel and learned counsel for the complainants do not dispute the factum of compromise. 5. In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties; the material made available for my perusal; considering the fact that petitioners and complainants have arrived at compromise and settled their dispute and in the view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr-reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC 604], the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners are liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties. [2026:RJ-JP:2795] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-344/2026] 6. In view of the above, this Criminal Misc. Petition is allowed and the entire criminal proceedings pending before learned Additional Session Judge No.2, Gangapur City, Sawai Madhopur in Session Case No.171/2021 (31/2018) arising out of FIR No.96/2018 registered at Police Station Batoda, District Sawai Madhopur are quashed and set aside on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. Consequence to follow. 7. Stay Application and pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /240