SUNIL KUMAR BAIRWA SON OF BABU LAL BAIRWA v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/1461/2026 · 2026-03-12
Anil Kumar Upman
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6260 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6260 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:10564] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1461/2026
1. Sunil Kumar Bairwa Son Of Babu Lal Bairwa, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of 653, Nandpuri Road, Manoharpura (Raj.)
2. Golu Meena Son Of Ram Lal Meena, Aged About 19 Years, Resident Of Dhayarna Ki Dhani, Bas Bilwa, Bilwa Kalan, Jaipur (Raj.)
3. Bittu Meena Son Of Om Prakash Meena, Aged About 19 Years, Resident Of Village Laxmipura, Post Bilwa, Bilwa Kalan, Jaipur (Raj.)
4. Vijay Bairwa Son Of Ramsahay Bairwa, Aged About 18 Years, Resident Of Bandada Wali Dhani, Roopaheri Kalan, Tehsil Kotkhawada, Roopaheri Kalan, Jaipur (Raj.). ----Petitioners Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through PP.
2. Dinesh Dhanka Son Of Lalchand, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Village Barkheda, Chaksu, Shivdaspura, Jaipur City South, (Raj.). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kailash Chand Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, PP with Mr. Shubham Sain, AAAG Mr. Hariram Gurjar, for complainant HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Order 12/03/2026
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-petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR No.139/2026 registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur City (South) for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 308(2) & 189(2) of BNS, 2023.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners. It is submitted that parties have settled their dispute amicably. It is submitted that
[2026:RJ-JP:10564] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1461/2026] due to compromise, further proceedings in the aforesaid FIR are fruitless. The written compromise has been annexed with this petition.
4.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant does 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 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.
6. In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No.139/2026 registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur City (South), is quashed and set aside. Consequence to follow.
7. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J CHARU SONI /179