Allowed¶33

Sohan Lal Son of Shri Babulal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 Jul 2025CRLMP/3705/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan High Court Jaipur; CRLMP-3705/2025; Sameer Jain J.; quashing of FIR on compromise; Section 528 BNSS inherent powers; FIR No. 092/2025 PS Balghat Karauli; Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 352 IPC; non-compoundable offences quashed after settlement; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Ramgopal 2022 (14) SCC 531; cross-FIR; personal dispute settled; no criminal antecedents; FIR and consequential proceedings quashed and set aside; petition allowed; pending applications disposed.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 092/2025 (Police Station Balghat, District Karauli) for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2) and 352 of IPC quashed and set aside along with all consequential proceedings; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ¶33

Sohan Lal Son of Shri Babulal Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR No. 092/2025 registered at Police Station Balghat, District Karauli (offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2) and 352 IPC) and the consequent criminal proceedings can be quashed on the basis of the compromise effected between the parties.

¶18

Court's answer

Applying the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Ramgopal (2022) 14 SCC 531, and considering the age of the petitioners, the absence of any criminal antecedents other than the present matter, and that the dispute is of a personal nature amicably settled between the parties, the Court deemed it just and proper to allow the miscellaneous petition; the compromise was taken on record.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

The criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed; FIR No. 092/2025 registered at Police Station Balghat, District Karauli for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2) and 352 of IPC, along with all consequential proceedings, stands quashed and set aside.

¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench (Sameer Jain, J.), allowed S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3705/2025 filed under Section 528 of BNSS seeking quashing of FIR No. 092/2025 registered at Police Station Balghat, District Karauli for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2) and 352 of IPC, on the basis of an amicable compromise reached between the parties through relatives, friends and neighbours. Placing reliance on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Ramgopal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2022 (14) SCC 531, and taking note of the personal nature of the dispute, the age of the petitioners and the absence of criminal antecedents other than the present matter, the Court took the compromise on record and quashed the FIR with all consequential proceedings. Cross-FIR and cross petitions (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition Nos. 3705/2025 and 3709/2025) were noted. Pending applications were disposed of.

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:24118]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3705/2025

¶4

Sohan Lal Son Of Shri Babulal, Ro Jahanagar Morda Tehsil And District Balghat District Karauli (Raj)

¶5

Mahendra Son Of Shri Babulal, Resident Of Jahanagar Morda Tehsil Balghat District Karauli (Raj)

¶6

Netram Son Of Shri Babulal, Resident Of Jahanagar Morda Tehsil Balghat District Karauli (Raj)

¶7

Rattiram Son Of Shivram, Resident Of Jahanagar Morda Tehsil Balghat District Karauli (Raj)

¶8

Narendra Kumar Son Of Shri Harkesh, Resident Of Bardala Tehsil Nadoti District Karauli (Raj)

¶9

----Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

State Of Rajasthan, through P.P

¶12

Ravi Son Of Gajendra Singh, Resident Of Jahanagar Morda, Tehsil Balghat District Karauli (Raj)

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Agarwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, Dy. GA Mr. V.S. Chouhan, Adv.

¶15

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶16

Judgment

¶17

01/07/2025

¶18

This petition under Section 528 of BNSS is filed, with a prayer to quash the FIR No.092/2025 registered at Police Station Balghat, District Karauli for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2) and 352 of IPC, on the basis of compromise effectuated between the parties herein, in respect of their inter-se dispute.

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:24118]

[CRLMP-3705/2025]

Counsel for the parties submit that cross-FIR was filed inter-se between the parties and consecutively cross petitions are filed bearing SB Criminal Misc. Petition Nos.3705/2025 and 3709/2025.

¶23

Learned counsel for both the parties, in presence of their respective clients, have submitted that the dispute was resolved by relatives, friends and neighbours and they have entered into a compromise and want to put quietus to the dispute inter-se between them.

¶24

Heard and considered.

¶25

At the outset, this Court deems it appropriate to place reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and Ramgopal Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in [2022 (14) SCC 531], relevant portion of which is reproduced below:

¶26

“12. The High Court, therefore, having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are noncompoundable.”

¶27

In view of the position of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in aforementioned case, and considering the age of the petitioners and considering the fact that they are not having any criminal antecedents other than the present matter registered

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:24118]

[CRLMP-3705/2025]

against them; also taking note of the fact that the dispute is of personal nature, which has been amicably settled between parties, this Court deems it just and proper to allow the present misc. petition. Compromise is taken on record.

¶32

Considering the aforementioned, the present criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the FIR No. 092/2025 registered at Police Station Balghat, District Karauli for offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 303(2) and 352 of IPC with all consequential proceedings, are hereby quashed and set aside.

¶33

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

¶34

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶35

CHANDAN /128

Sohan Lal Son of Shri Babulal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohan Lal Son of Shri Babulal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Madan Lal Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Babu Lal S/O Shri Chiranji Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwan Singh Son of Shri Anna Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Amarbati Gelda Wife of Late Shri Padam Chand Golda, Vs State of Rajasthan

Vijay Singh S/O Shri Mahendra Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ravi Singh Rajput Son of Shri Gajendra Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan