[2026:RJ-JP:5269] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 707/2025 1. Bholu S/o Udaysingh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Badi Road, Sepau, P.S. Sepau, Distt. Dholpur (Raj). 2. Prashant Singh S/o Bhoora Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Rajora Khurd P.S. Sepau, Distt. Dholpur , (Raj.) 3. Hirdosh Tomer S/o Munna Singh, Behind New Tehsil, Sepau, P.S. Sepau Distt. Dholpur (Raj). ----Accused Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through the P.P. 2. Bhanu Pratap S/o Ramveer, Aged About 30 Years, Behind New Tehsil , Sepau P.S. Sepau, Distt. Dholpur (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Pallav Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.1 For Respondent no.2 : : Mr. Amit Punia, Addl. GA with Mr. Shubham Sain, AAAG Mr. Anupam Sharma, Advocate HO N'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 04/02/2026 1. This petition under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the petitioners seeking to quash and set-aside the FIR No. 374/2024 registered at Police Station Kolari, District Dholpur for offence under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 125, 324(4), 303(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 2. Pursuant to the order dated 1.4.2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioners no. 2 and 3 and the respondent no.2 are present in person today in the Court. [2026:RJ-JP:5269] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-707/2025] Their signature have been obtained in the Court and they have been duly identified by their respective counsel. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the that parties do not have any animosity against each other but on account of some sudden altercations/ scuffle erupted between parties on 21.10.2024, impugned FIR came to be lodged against petitioners. Now, the parties have entered into a compromise and buried their hatchet in order to maintain peace and harmony in their life and to maintain cordial relations between them. A written Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) executed between both parties has been placed on record. He further submits that most of the offences are compoundable, therefore, the impugned FIR and the subsequent criminal proceedings arising of the said FIR be quashed and set-aside and the petitioners be acquitted for the alleged offence(s) on the basis of compromise. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 concurs with the factum of compromise. He further submits that the complainant does not want to prosecute the petitioners further in the matter. He has shown no objection in case the FIR No. 374/2024 and all subsequent criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR are quashed and the petitioners are acquitted for the alleged offence(s) on the basis of compromise. 5. Learned Addl. GA has submitted the factual report dated 4.2.2026 sent to him by SHO, Police Station, Kolari, District Dholpur and admits that both the parties have entered into the compromise. The said factual report is taken on record. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record. [2026:RJ-JP:5269] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-707/2025] 7. From a perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that the respondent no.2 is agreeable to drop criminal proceedings in view of compromise arrived at between parties, the dispute between the parties is personal in nature, most of the offences are compoundable, the continuation of criminal proceedings against petitioners would be abuse of process of law, therefore, to secure ends of justice, the impugned FIR as also the subsequent criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR qua the petitioners deserves to be quashed, in exercise of inherent powers of the High Court under Section 528 BNSS. 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab[(2012) 10 SCC 303] observed as follows: “Quashing of offence or criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between an offender and victim is not the same thing as compounding of offence. They are different and not interchangeable. Strictly speaking, the power of compounding of offences given to a court under Section 320 is materially different from the quashing of criminal proceedings by the High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. In compounding of offences, power of a criminal court is circumscribed by the provisions contained in Section 320 and the court is guided solely and squarely thereby while, on the other hand, the formation of opinion by the High Court for quashing a criminal offence or criminal proceeding or criminal complaint is guided by the material on record as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power although the ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment.” 9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in [2022 (14) SCC 531 observed as follows:- [2026:RJ-JP:5269] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-707/2025] “12. The High Court, therefore, having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are non compoundable.” 10. In view of legal proposition of law laid down by the Apex Court in aforesaid cases, and considering peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and since both parties have amicably settled their dispute and to prevent the abuse of the process of law, this Court deems it just and proper to quash the FIR No. 0374/2024 registered at Police Station, Kolari, District Dholpur as also the subsequent criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR qua petitioners and to acquit the petitioners for the alleged offence(s). 11. As a result, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and FIR No. 0374/2024 registered at Police Station, Kolari, District Dholpur as also the subsequent criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR qua petitioners are hereby quashed and set aside and the petitioners are acquitted for the alleged offence(s) 12. All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J DK/3