Kuka @ Surendra Singh Son of Shri Shankar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Kuka @ Surendra Singh Son of Shri Shankar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No quashing granted; petition disposed of with the expectation that the Trial Court expedite the pending proceedings and conclude the trial expeditiously. Stay application and all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.259/2021 (P.S. Beawer Sadar, District Ajmer) and the entire proceedings arising out of it, including Criminal Case No.365/2021 pending before the Court at Beawer, should be quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

Since the charge-sheet had been submitted and the prosecutrix's statements had been recorded before the Trial Court, the Court did not quash the FIR or the proceedings; it disposed of the criminal miscellaneous petition with the expectation that the Trial Court make all possible endeavours to speed up the pending proceedings and conclude the trial expeditiously, as early as possible.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), Anoop Kumar Dhand, J. — S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.451/2022, decided 17/04/2026. Petition for quashing of FIR No.259/2021, Police Station Beawer Sadar, District Ajmer (offences under Sections 365, 363, 376 D & 328 IPC and Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, 1989) and the entire proceedings arising therefrom, including Criminal Case No.365/2021 pending before the Court at Beawer, founded on a compromise in which the prosecutrix admitted the petitioner's name was inadvertently mentioned and, during trial, levelled allegations only against the coaccused. Though the complainant's counsel accepted the factum of compromise, the Court — noting that the charge-sheet stood submitted and the prosecutrix's statements had been recorded before the Trial Court — declined to quash and disposed of the petition, expecting the Trial Court to make all possible endeavours to speed up the pending proceedings and conclude the trial expeditiously. Stay application and pending applications disposed of.

[2026:RJ-JP:16200]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.451/2022

Kuka @ Surendra Singh Son Of Shri Shankar Singh, Aged About 22 Years, Resident Of Village Saradhana, Police Station Sendra District Pali

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.

Victim

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Saurabh Bhandari
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP with
	Ms. Neha Goyal
	Mr. Rahul Patni with
	Mr. Saurabh Singh

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order

17/04/2026

The instant criminal misc. petition has been preferred for quashing of FIR No.259/2021, registered with Police Station Beawer Sadar, District Ajmer for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 363, 376 D & 328 IPC and Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 and the entire proceedings arising out of the same including proceedings of Criminal Case No.365/2021, pending before the Court at Beawer on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though in the aforesaid impugned FIR and the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has levelled allegations against the petitioner. However, at a later stage, she has

[2026:RJ-JP:16200]

[CRLMP-451/2022]

(2 of 2)

submitted a compromise before this Court, wherein she has admitted that name of the petitioner has been inadvertently mentioned in the impugned FIR. Learned counsel submits that on the basis of the aforesaid compromise submitted by the prosecutrix, the petitioner was granted benefit of bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court. He further submits that even during the course of trial when the statements of prosecutrix were recorded, she has not levelled any allegations against the petitioner and allegations have only been levelled against the coaccused, hence, under these circumstances, the proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR be quashed.

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, but the counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant accepted the factum of compromise between the parties. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Looking to the fact that after submission of charge-sheet, statements of the prosecutrix have been recorded before the Trial Court, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant criminal misc. petition with the expectation from the Trial Court to make all possible endeavours to speed up the pending proceedings and conclude the trial expeditiously, as early as possible.

Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. Stay application as well as all pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

Karan/9