Allowed

Mohan Lal Meena Son of Shri Bhori Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC24 Nov 2025CRLMP/6949/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought quashing of an FIR on the basis of a compromise between the parties. The compromise was verified by the Investigating Officer. Applying Gian Singh and Laxmi Narayan, the court invoked its inherent powers and quashed the FIR proceedings against the petitioners.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mohan Lal Meena Son of Shri Bhori Lal Vs State of Rajasthan — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6949/2025

¶3

Mohan Lal Meena Son Of Shri Bhori Lal, Resident Of Choti Badh Ki Dhani, Budthal, Bassi, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶4

Gopal Lal Meena Son Of Gyarsi Lal Meena, Resident Of Dantly Sanganer, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶8

Bhirgu Pareek Son Of Late Narendra Kumar Pareek, Resident Of 3, Indra Puri, Shiva Ji Chowk, Bharampuri, Khurra, Nahargarh, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shubham Singhal for Mr. Arvind Balaut

¶11

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP Mr. Ajay Pal Meena

¶12

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶13

Order

¶14

24/11/2025

¶15

By way of filing this petition, a prayer has been made to quash the FIR No.89/2025 registered with Police Station Banipark, District Jaipur (West) under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the BNS on the basis of compromise arrived between the parties.

¶16

Counsel for the petitioner submits that after registration of the aforesaid FIR, the complainant has submitted a compromise in favour of the petitioners and he does not want to prosecute the petitioners. Counsel submits that in light of the compromise arrived between the parties, the proceedings

¶17

[CRLMP-6949/2025]

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

arising out of the impugned FIR be quashed, as the dispute pertains to personal in nature.

¶20

In support of his contentions, counsel has placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the Apex Court in the case 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 .

¶21

Counsel for the complainant has no objection, in case, proceedings are quashed on the basis of the compromise. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer. 6. This Court vide order dated 03.11.2025 directed the parties to appear before the Investigating Officer for verification of the compromise. 7. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the parties have appeared before the Investigating Officer, who has verified the factum of compromise between them vide verification report dated 09.11.2025.

¶22

Considering the submissions made by counsel for the parties and in the view of the aforesaid compromise arrived at between the parties and applying the principles of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra), this Court deems it just and appropriate to invoke inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 BNSS.

¶23

Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition is allowed. Proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR No.89/2025 registered with Police Station Banipark, District Jaipur (West)

¶24

[CRLMP-6949/2025]

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of the BNS, against the petitioners stand quashed.

¶27