[2026:RJ-JP:21789] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6815/2024 1. Sumit S/o Shri Shrichand, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ward No. 3, Ajitpura, Kudan, Police Station Dadiya, District Sikar (Raj.) 2. Prashant Dhinva S/o Sh. Suresh Kumar, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Village Ajitpura, Police Station Dadiya, District Sikar, Raj. 3. Sachin Kumar S/o Sh. Pradeep, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Village Ajitpura, Police Station Dadiya, District Sikar, Raj. 4. Sunil @ Pandya S/o Sh. Hariram, Aged About 22 Years, R/o Khniwasar, Tehsil Lakshmangarh, District Sikar, Raj. 5. Dhiraj S/o Sh. Surendra Singh, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Ramsinghpura, District Sikar, Raj. 6. Pradeep Kumar S/o Shri Shivpal Meel, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Ward No. 8, Village Kolida, Police Station Dadiya, District Sikar (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Anil Matwa S/o Shri Ammilal, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Khemri Ki Dhani, Khirod, Nawalgarh, Jhunjhunu. At Present Resident Of Village Dharamshala Beri, Police Station Dadiya, District Sikar (Raj.). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Khedar For Respondent(s) : Mr. JS Rathore, PP with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Asstt.GA Mr. Himanshu for Mr. Manvendra Singh Choudhary JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 22/05/2026 1. By way of filing the instant petition, a prayer has been made to quash the proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR [2026:RJ-JP:21789] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6815/2024] No.160/2024 registered with Police Station Dadiya, District Sikar for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 427, 452, 365, 511, 504 and 382 IPC, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after registration of the aforesaid FIR, the complainant-respondent has submitted compromise in favour of the petitioners indicating that under mistake, he has lodged impugned FIR against the petitioners and now he does not want to prosecute the petitioners. Counsel submits that the petitioners have prayed for quashing the proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR in light of the compromise submitted by the complainant. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer, while counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant-respondent admits the factum of compromise arrived between the parties and submits that the complainant has no objection, in case the proceedings of the impugned FIR are quashed in light of the compromise between the parties. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioners as well as counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant-respondent and looking to the fact that the dispute between the parties is of personal in nature and the complainant does not wish to prosecute the petitioners and looking to the contents of the compromise arrived at between the parties and also applying the proposition of law as laid down by the Hon’ble [2026:RJ-JP:21789] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6815/2024] Apex Court in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 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 inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 6. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition is allowed. The proceedings arsing out the impugned FIR No.160/2024, registered with Police Station Dadiya, District Sikar for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 427, 452, 365, 511, 504 and 382 IPC, stand quashed. 7. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/35