The High Court quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings under the IPC and SC/ST Act upon a joint submission by the parties that a private settlement had been reached and no grievance remained.
FIR No. 26/2025 and all subsequent proceedings quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2025:RJ-JP:20521]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2851/2025
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Santosh Kumar Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, PP Mr. Ajay Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order
15/05/2025
;kphx.k }kjk /kkjk 528 Hkkjrh; ukxfjd lqj{kk lafgrk ds varxZr izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 26@2025 fnukad 21-02-2025 iqfyl Fkkuk& jk;Fky] ftyk& cwanh vijk/k varxZr /kkjk 115¼2½] 126¼2½] 352] 351¼2½] 351¼3½] 3¼5½ Hkkjrh; U;k; lafgrk o /kkjk 3¼1½¼r½] 3¼1½¼s½ vuqlwfpr tkfr ,oa vuqlwfpr tutkfr ¼u`'kalrk fuokj.k½ vf/kfu;e esa i{kdjksa ds e/; ijLij gq, jkthukek izn'kZ 3 ds vk/kkj ij izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ o mlls mnHkwr leLr dk;Zokgh dks jnn o vikLr djus dk vuqrks"k pkgk gSA
[2025:RJ-JP:20521]
[CRLMP-2851/2025]
(2 of 2)
fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kphx.k dk rdZ gS fd ;kphx.k ,oa ifjoknh ¼izR;FkhZ la[;k 2½ ds e/; ijLij jkthuke gks x;k gS ,oa bl lanHkZ esa ifjoknh Jh dgSU;k yky } kjk ,d 'kiFk i= fnukafdr 04-03-2025 dk fu"ikfnr fd;k gS tks fd izn'kZ 3 ds :i esa ;kfpdk ds lkFk layXu gSA vr% jkthukek ds vk/kkj ij mDr izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ o mlls mnHkwr leLr dk;Zokgh dks jnn o vikLr fd;k tk,A
izR;FkhZ la[;k 2 dh vksj ls vf/koDrk Jh vt; flag mifLFkr gSa vkSj muds } kjk bl rF; dks Lohdkj fd;k x;k gS fd i{kdjksa ds e/; ijLij jkthukek gks x;k gS vkSj ;fj ;kphx.k ds fo#) izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ o mlls mnHkwr leLr dk;Zokgh jnnh o vikLr dh tkrh gSa rks mUgsa dksbZ vkifRr ugha gSA
cgl lquh xbZA i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA
i{kdkjksa ds e/; fookn vkilh fookn gS vkSj ml fookn }kjk ogn lekt ij dksbZ foijhr izHkko ugh iM+rk gSA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds U;kf;d n"Vkar
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] rFkk led{k ihB }kjk ikfjr U;kf;d fu.kZ; Haneef Khan v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5913@2022 fnukad 15-03-2024 rFkk Dhanraj/ Vishal v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5913/2022 fnukad 15-03-2024 esa izfrikfnr fl)karksa dks nf"Vxr j[krs gq, izLrqr izdj.k esa ;kphx.k ds fo#) iathc) izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 26@2025 iqfyl Fkkuk& jk;Fky] ftyk& cwanh vijk/k varxZr /kkjk 115¼2½] 126¼2½] 352] 351¼2½] 351¼3½] 3¼5½ Hkkjrh; U;k; lafgrk o /kkjk 3¼1½¼r½] 3¼1½¼s½ vuwlwfpr tkfr ,oa vuqlwfpr tutkfr ¼u'kalrk fuokj.k½ vf/kfu;e dks jnn fd;k tkrk gS vkSj mDr izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ls mnHkwr leLr vkijkf/kd dk;Zokgh dks Hkh mijksDr vuqlkj jn~n o vikLr fd;k tkrk gSA
lHkh yafcr izkFkZuk&i=ksa dks Hkh mijksDr vuqlkj fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J
RAMESHWAR PRASHAD /60
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the First Information Report and subsequent criminal proceedings should be quashed in light of a private settlement?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabRelied on¶24
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] · Who else cites this
Haneef Khan v. State of RajasthanRelied on¶24
Haneef Khan v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5913@2022 fnukad 15-03-2024
Dhanraj/ Vishal v. State of RajasthanRelied on¶24
Dhanraj/ Vishal v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5913/2022 fnukad 15-03-2024
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ramesh Chand Chandna
Arvind
Neeraj Kumar
Abhay @ Chintu
The State of Rajasthan
Kanhaiya Lal
Praveer Bhatnagar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
