AVINASH SHARMA S/O SHRI MAHESH CHAND SHARMA, v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/998/2026 · 2026-03-06
Anil Kumar Upman
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4803 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4803 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:9812] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 998/2026 Avinash Sharma S/o Shri Mahesh Chand Sharma, R/o 205, First Floor, Shiv Villa Residency, Ganesh Nagar Second-C, Swej Farm, Ramnagar Extension, Sodala, Jaipur (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP ----Respondent
2. Vijay Ramawat S/o Shri Arjun Das Ramawat, R/o 50, Kailashpuri, Near Shyam Nagar Metro Station, Ramnagar, Sodala, Jaipur (Raj). --Complainant-Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankur Singh Tomar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP Mr. Virendra Singh, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 06/03/2026
1. Parties are present in person and they have been duly identified by their respective counsel.
2. By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 528 of BNSS, the accused-petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR No.97/2024 registered at Special Crime and Cyber Crime Police Station, Commissionerate Jaipur, District Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime), Commissionerate Jaipur, for the offences punishable under Sections 420 & 406 of IPC and Section 66(c) of I.T. Act.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that parties have settled their dispute amicably. It is submitted that due to compromise, further proceedings in the aforesaid FIR are fruitless. The written compromise has been annexed with this petition.
[2026:RJ-JP:9812] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-998/2026]
4. Learned Public Prosecutor places verification report dated 24.02.2026 received from the SHO, Cyber Crime Police Station, Commissionerate Jaipur. According to which, parties have entered into compromise. The said report is taken on record.
5.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant does not dispute the factum of compromise.
6. In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties; the material made available for perusal; considering the fact that parties have resolved their dispute amicably and also finding that the present case is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme 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] and as such, the aforesaid FIR is liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties.
7. In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No.97/2024 registered at Special Crime and Cyber Crime Police Station, Commissionerate Jaipur, District Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime), Commissionerate Jaipur, is quashed and set aside. Consequence to follow.
8. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /126