Allowed¶33

Ashok Pansari Son of Shri Vimal Chand Jain, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC30 Oct 2025CRLMP/5398/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR/criminal proceedings; Section 143 IPC unlawful assembly; Sections 323, 341 & 506 IPC compounded on compromise; inherent powers Section 528 BNSS; non-compoundable offence quashed on settlement; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688; complainants no objection; discharge from charge; Criminal Case No.570/2018 Jaipur; CRLMP 5398/2025; Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench; Anoop Kumar Dhand, J.; order dated 30/10/2025; neutral citation [2025:RJ-JP:43613].

What did the court decide?

Petitioners discharged from the charge under Section 143 IPC in Criminal Case No.570/2018 pending before the Court of Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur; stay application and all pending applications disposed of. ¶33

Ashok Pansari Son of Shri Vimal Chand Jain, Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners under Section 143 IPC in Criminal Case No.570/2018 ought to be quashed in exercise of the Court's inherent powers, notwithstanding that the offence is not compoundable, in view of the compromise/amicable settlement between the parties.

¶24

Court's answer

In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the amicable settlement of the dispute, the complainant's unwillingness to prosecute, and applying the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gian Singh and Laxmi Narayan (supra), this Court deemed it just and proper to invoke its inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

The petitioners are discharged from the charge under Section 143 IPC in Criminal Case No.570/2018 pending before the Court of Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur.

¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench (Anoop Kumar Dhand, J.), order dated 30/10/2025 in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5398/2025 — Quashing of criminal proceedings / compounding on compromise — Petitioners faced trial for offences under Sections 143, 323, 341 & 506 IPC in Criminal Case No.570/2018 (Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-I). During trial the parties compromised; by order dated 10.07.2025 the trial court verified the compromise and discharged the petitioners for offences under Sections 323, 341 & 506 IPC, but declined to verify the compromise for the offence under Section 143 IPC as non-compoundable. The complainants (respondents Nos. 2 and 3) appeared in person, verified the factum of compromise and stated no objection to the petitioners' discharge under Section 143 IPC. Applying Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 and The State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, and invoking inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, the Court allowed the petition and discharged the petitioners from the charge under Section 143 IPC in Criminal Case No.570/2018.

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:43613]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5398/2025

¶4

Ashok Pansari Son Of Shri Vimal Chand Jain, Aged About 53 Years, Resident Of 4/713, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur

¶5

Vinod Shrimal Son Of Late Shri Mansingh Shrimal, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of 4/49, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶6

Naveen Dhor Son Of Shri Chiranji Lal, Aged About 53 Years, Resident Of Flat No. 25, Nandpuri, Jagdish Vihar Ii, Prem Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶7

Sunil Kumar Jain S/o Late Shri Malchand Jain, Aged About 51 Years, Resident Of B-47, Prabhu Marg, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur

¶8

Shanti Chand Jargad S/o Shri Sukhlal Jargad, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of D-51, Subhash Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan

¶9

----Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶12

Shri Anil Kumar Jain S/o Late Shri Padam Chand Jain, Resident Of B-34, Prabhu Marg, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur

¶13

Smt. Sapna Jhadchur W/o Shri Anil Kumar Jain, Resident Of B-34, Prabhu Marg, Tilak Nagar, Jaipur.

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Shubham Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Amit Gupta, PP
	Mr.	Iskandh Sharma

¶16

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶17

Order

¶18

30/10/2025

¶19

By way of filing this criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for quashing of criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.570/2018 against the petitioners before the court of Additional

[2025:RJ-JP:43613]

[CRLMP-5398/2025]

(2 of 3)

Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 341 & 506 IPC and during pendency of the trial, compromise has taken place between the parties and the compromise has been attested by the trial court for the offences under Sections 323, 341 & 506 IPC and proceedings have been dropped against them vide order dated 10.07.2025, but the offence under Section 143 IPC has not been compounded as the same is not compoundable. Learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 and The State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan reported in 2019 (5) SCC 688 . Learned counsel submits that under these circumstances, the proceedings pending against the petitioners under Section 143 IPC be quashed.

¶25

The complainants/respondents are present in person and they have been duly identified by their counsel. They verify the factum of compromise and state that now they have no objection in case the petitioners are discharged from the charges under Section 143 IPC.

¶26

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record.

¶27

Perusal of the record indicates that the trial Court has verified the compromise vide order dated 10.07.2025 to the extent of the offence under Sections 323, 341 & 506 IPC and discharged the petitioners from the charge under Sections 323,

[2025:RJ-JP:43613]

[CRLMP-5398/2025]

(3 of 3)

341 & 506 IPC, however, the trial Court has declined to verify the compromise with regard to the offence under Section 143 IPC on the ground that the said offence is not compoundable.

¶32

In view of the aforesaid compromise arrived at between the parties and looking to the fact that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and now the complainant does not want to prosecute the petitioners and also applying the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Gian Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to invoke inherent powers of this Court contained under Section 528 BNSS.

¶33

Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands allowed. The petitioners are discharged from the charge under Sections 143 IPC in Criminal Case No.570/2018 pending before the Court of Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur. 8. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶34

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶35

Karan/17

Ashok Pansari Son of Shri Vimal Chand Jain, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Pansari Son of Shri Vimal Chand Jain, 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

Raja Ram Agarwal S/O Shri Girdhari Lal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Babulal Yogi S/O Shri Ram Nath Yogi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Shubham Sharma S/O Shri Arun Kumar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Chandrakala Daughter of Shri Radheyshyam Kushwah, Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Singh S/O Shri Bahadur Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Sukhwant Singh Son of Shri Mukhtyar Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan