Allowed¶35

Polu Ram @ Labhchand S/O Shri Hanshraj v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Jan 2025CRLMP/6430/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on basis of compromise between parties; non-compoundable offences under BNS, 2023 (Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 331(6), 109(1), 307, 324(4)); petition under Section 528 B.N.S.S. 2023; FIR No.409/2024, Police Station Kekri City, District Kekri; compromise verified by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Circle Kekri (report dated 04.01.2025); Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934; State of Haryana v. Choudhary Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604; harmony and quietus to litigation; Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench; CRLMP-6430/2024.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.409/2024 registered at Police Station Kekri City, District Kekri quashed along with all other proceedings arising therefrom; stay application disposed of. ¶35

Polu Ram @ Labhchand S/O Shri Hanshraj Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

FIR No.409/2024 registered at Police Station Kekri City, District Kekri quashed along with all other proceedings arising therefrom; stay application disposed of.

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.409/2024 registered at Police Station Kekri City, District Kekri, and the proceedings arising therefrom, could be quashed on the ground that the parties have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their dispute, even though the offences alleged are non-compoundable.

¶27

Court's answer

In order to establish harmony between the petitioners and the complainants and give quietus to the litigation, it was expedient that the impugned FIR be quashed.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

Following the principles in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934) and State of Haryana v. Choudhary Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604), an FIR is liable to be quashed in view of a compromise arrived at between the parties although the offences are non-compoundable.

¶34

Key takeaways

The criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed; FIR No.409/2024 registered at Police Station Kekri City, District Kekri stands quashed, along with all other proceedings arising therefrom, and the stay application is disposed of.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), single Judge (Ashutosh Kumar, J.), order dated 06/01/2025, in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6430/2024: Petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023 sought quashing of FIR No.409/2024 registered at Police Station Kekri City, District Kekri for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 331(6), 109(1), 307 & 324(4) of BNS, 2023, mainly on the ground that the parties had compromised and amicably settled their dispute. Pursuant to directions dated 06.12.2024, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Circle Kekri submitted a factual report dated 04.01.2025 confirming before the Investigating Officer that the complainants and petitioners had settled the dispute by way of compromise; the compromise deed was annexed to the petition. Holding that quashing would establish harmony between the parties and give quietus to the litigation, and applying the principles in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934) and State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. (AIR 1992 SC 604), the Court held the FIR liable to be quashed in view of the compromise although the offences were non-compoundable. Petition allowed; FIR No.409/2024 and all proceedings arising therefrom quashed; stay application disposed of.

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:650]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6430/2024

¶4

Polu Ram @ Labhchand S/o Shri Hanshraj, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Badaguvada, Kekri Tehsil-Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶5

Manoj S/o Shri Polu Ram @ Labhchand, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Badaguvada, Kekri Tehsil-Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶6

Ramsaroop Jat S/o Shri Ramgopal Jat, R/o Ugankheda, Tehsil Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶7

Polu @ Khagendr S/o Shri Kumaranand, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Sankariya, Tehsil Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶8

Ramraj S/o Shri Satyanarayan, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Village Badaguvada, Kekri Tehsil-Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶9

Mukesh S/o Shri Hanshraj, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Ugankheda, Tehsil Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶10

Ashok S/o Shri Ghisha Lal, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Gujarwada, Tehsil-Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶11

Dharampal S/o Shri Suresh Kudi, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Kota Road, Tehsil Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶12

----Petitioners

¶13

Versus

¶14

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶15

Reshma @ Resham W/o Sanowar, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Akash Vihar, Dasna Dehat, Masoori, P.s. Masoori, Gajiyabad, Uttar Pradesh, At Present Parsuram Circle, Kekri, District Kekri.

¶16

Manisha @ Shila Devi W/o Chandra Pal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ashok Vihar, Delhi, P.s. Ashok Vihar, Delhi At Present Parsuram Circle, Kekri, District Kekri.

¶17

Sushila @ Soniya W/o Rajesh D/o Shri Chotelal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Rz/c-16, Jankipuri, Near Dda Flat, Uttam Nagar, West Delhi, P.s. Dabri, Delhi At Present Parsuram Circle, Kekri, District Kekri.

¶18

Tikam Chand S/o Shri Kailash Chand Acharya, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ajmer Road, Kekri, Tehsil-Kekri, District Kekri, Raj.

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijendra Yadav, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP Mr. Manish K. Saini, Adv.

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:650]

[CRLMP-6430/2024]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶25

Order

¶26

06/01/2025

¶27

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. 2023 for quashing of FIR No.409/2024 registered at Police Station Kekri City, District Kekri for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 189(2), 331(6), 109(1), 307 & 324(4) of BNS, 2023 mainly on the ground that the parties have entered into compromise and amicably settled their dispute and now no dispute remains between them. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties submitted that parties have settled their dispute amicably and complainants does not want to proceed further in this FIR. 3. On 06.12.2024, parties were directed to appear before the Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer was directed to verify the factum of compromise between the parties and submit its report. Therefore, learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the factual report dated 04.01.2025 sent by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Circle Kekri, in which it has been mentioned that the complainants and petitioners appeared before the Investigating Officer and submitted that they have settled their dispute by way of compromise. Compromise deed has also annexed with this petition.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record.

¶29

In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties and the material made

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:650]

[CRLMP-6430/2024]

available for my perusal, this Court feels that in order to establish harmony between the petitioners and the complainants and give quietus to the litigation, it would be expedient that the impugned FIR is quashed.

¶34

The present case is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.-reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC 604], the FIR is liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties although the offences are non-compoundable.

¶35

In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and FIR No.409/2024 registered at Police Station Kekri City, District Kekri is quashed and all other proceedings arising out thereof are also quashed. Consequence to follow.

¶36

The stay application also stands disposed of.

¶37

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR),J

¶38

Mohita /165

Polu Ram @ Labhchand S/O Shri Hanshraj v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Polu Ram @ Labhchand S/O Shri Hanshraj 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

Smt. Sonal Bansal Wife of Late Shri Sunil Bansal, Vs State of Rajasthan

Ashish Jain @ Ashish Kumar Jain @ Ashish Son of Mahesh Kumar Jain, Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanjay Singh Pilwal S/O Babulal Gurjar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Rugha Ram S/O Sh. Sultan Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Dr. Lokesh Bargoti @ Dr. Lokesh Meena S/O Shri Kanaram Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Amiri Devi Wife of Shri Om Prakash Vs State of Rajasthan