[2026:RJ-JP:18589] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3608/2022 1. Suraj Mal Son Of Shri Kishan Lal Sharma, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Post Udawala Via Sainthal, Tehsil And District Dausa. 2. Yash Pal Das Chela Ram Dayal Das, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Dayal Colony, Opposite Khadi Bhandar, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur. 3. Hem Pal Meena Son Of Shri Gaindi Lal Meena, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Plot No. 8 Kailash Puri Amer Road, Jaipur. 4. Dinesh Kumar Sonf Of Shri Nathu Lal Sharma, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Plot No. 43 Krishan Nagar, Imliwala Phatak Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Shakuntala Wife Of Shri Ramesh Chand, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Kothi Walon Ki Dhani, Village Jhar, Post Dudhly, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vaibhav Pancholi for Mr. Krishan Chander Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 01/05/2026 1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been preferred for quashing of the FIR No.15/2020, registered at Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur City (East) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, on the basis of compromise between the parties. [2026:RJ-JP:18589] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-3608/2022] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain dispute arose between the parties with regard to a sale deed, for which the impugned FIR was registered and a civil suit was also filed by the petitioner No.1. Counsel submits that the parties have settled their dispute by entering into a compromise and on the basis of the said compromise, the aforesaid civil suit has also been withdrawn. Counsel submits that the complainant has written a compromise in favour of the petitioners stating that she does not wish to prosecute the petitioners and in case, the proceedings of the aforementioned FIR No.15/2020 is dropped, she has no objection. She has duly signed the compromise dated 11.02.2022. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, the proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR be quashed. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer. 4. Heard and consider the submissions. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the dispute is of personal in nature and the parties have arrived at an amicable compromise before the Civil Court and the suit submitted by the petitioner No.1 has been withdrawn on the basis of the aforesaid compromise and also considering the fact that a compromise deed has also been executed by the complainant on 11.02.2022, wherein she has stated that she has no objection in case the proceedings of the impugned FIR are dropped and also considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and applying the principles of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [2026:RJ-JP:18589] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-3608/2022] reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 & State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688, this Court deems it just and appropriate to invoke its inherent powers contained under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 6. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition is allowed. The proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR No.15/2020, registered with Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur City (East) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, against the petitioners stand quashed and set- aside. 7. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/15