Allowed¶30

Suraj Mal Son of Shri Kishan Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC1 May 2026CRLMP/3608/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on compromise; Section 482 CrPC inherent powers; Gian Singh v State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of MP v Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688; IPC Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B; FIR No.15/2020 Police Station Bassi District Jaipur City (East); sale deed dispute; compromise deed dated 11.02.2022; withdrawal of civil suit; CRLMP 3608/2022; Rajasthan High Court Jaipur; decision date 01/05/2026.

What did the court decide?

Instant criminal miscellaneous petition allowed; proceedings arising out of FIR No.15/2020 (Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur City (East); Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC) against the petitioners quashed and set aside; stay application and all pending applications disposed of. ¶30

Suraj Mal Son of Shri Kishan Lal Sharma Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.15/2020 (offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur City (East)) should be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶16

Court's answer

The dispute being personal in nature, with the parties having arrived at an amicable compromise before the Civil Court (pursuant to which petitioner No.1's suit was withdrawn and a compromise deed dated 11.02.2022 was executed by the complainant recording no objection to dropping the FIR proceedings), the Court found it just and appropriate to exercise its inherent jurisdiction.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

Applying the principles of law laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr., (2012) 10 SCC 303, and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., (2019) 5 SCC 688, the Court invoked its inherent powers contained under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶29

Key takeaways

The proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR No.15/2020, registered with Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur City (East) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, against the petitioners stand quashed and set aside.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), single judge (Anoop Kumar Dhand, J.), order dated 01/05/2026 in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3608/2022: Allowed. Proceedings arising out of FIR No.15/2020, Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur City (East), for offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, quashed and set aside under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of an amicable compromise between the parties (compromise deed dated 11.02.2022 executed by the complainant, who stated she had no objection to the FIR proceedings being dropped); the underlying dispute concerned a sale deed, and the civil suit filed by petitioner No.1 had already been withdrawn pursuant to the compromise. Principles laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr., (2012) 10 SCC 303, and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., (2019) 5 SCC 688, applied. Stay application and pending applications disposed of.

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:18589]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3608/2022

¶4

Suraj Mal Son Of Shri Kishan Lal Sharma, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Post Udawala Via Sainthal, Tehsil And District Dausa.

¶5

Yash Pal Das Chela Ram Dayal Das, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Dayal Colony, Opposite Khadi Bhandar, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur.

¶6

Hem Pal Meena Son Of Shri Gaindi Lal Meena, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Plot No. 8 Kailash Puri Amer Road, Jaipur.

¶7

Dinesh Kumar Sonf Of Shri Nathu Lal Sharma, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Plot No. 43 Krishan Nagar, Imliwala Phatak Jaipur.

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Shakuntala Wife Of Shri Ramesh Chand, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Kothi Walon Ki Dhani, Village Jhar, Post Dudhly, Tehsil Bassi, District Jaipur.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Vaibhav Pancholi for
	Mr. Krishan Chander Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore,PP

¶13

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶14

Order

¶15

01/05/2026

¶16

The instant criminal misc. petition has been preferred for quashing of the FIR No.15/2020, registered at Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur City (East) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, on the basis of compromise between the parties.

(2 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:18589]

[CRLMP-3608/2022]

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain dispute arose between the parties with regard to a sale deed, for which the impugned FIR was registered and a civil suit was also filed by the petitioner No.1. Counsel submits that the parties have settled their dispute by entering into a compromise and on the basis of the said compromise, the aforesaid civil suit has also been withdrawn. Counsel submits that the complainant has written a compromise in favour of the petitioners stating that she does not wish to prosecute the petitioners and in case, the proceedings of the aforementioned FIR No.15/2020 is dropped, she has no objection. She has duly signed the compromise dated 11.02.2022. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, the proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR be quashed.

¶21

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer.

¶22

Heard and consider the submissions.

¶23

Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel

¶24

for the petitioner and looking to the fact that the dispute is of personal in nature and the parties have arrived at an amicable compromise before the Civil Court and the suit submitted by the petitioner No.1 has been withdrawn on the basis of the aforesaid compromise and also considering the fact that a compromise deed has also been executed by the complainant on 11.02.2022, wherein she has stated that she has no objection in case the proceedings of the impugned FIR are dropped and also considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and applying the principles of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.

(3 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:18589]

[CRLMP-3608/2022]

reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 & State of Madhya Pradesh

¶29

Vs. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688, this Court deems it just and appropriate to invoke its inherent powers contained under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶30

Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition is allowed. The proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR No.15/2020, registered with Police Station Bassi, District Jaipur City (East) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, against the petitioners stand quashed and setaside.

¶31

The stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶32

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶33

KuD/15

Suraj Mal Son of Shri Kishan Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Mal Son of Shri Kishan Lal Sharma 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. Manju Choudhary D/O Mr. Lila Ram Choudhary W/O Shri Vikas Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Gurjar S/O Sh. Prem Singh Gurjar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Kashif Zuberi S/O Shri Saleem Zuberi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Vishnu Kumar Sharma S/O Late Shri Suresh Chand Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Badrilal Sharma S/O Shri Jamunashankar Ji Sharma, Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Bhat S/O Shri Jitendra Bhat Vs State of Rajasthan