Ajay Verma S/O Shaitan, Vs State of Rajasthan

The instant criminal misc. Petitions have been filed under Section 528 B.N.S.S. for quashing of F.I.R. No.408/2024 registered at Police Station Samod, Jaipur Rural, Jaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 126(2), 115(2), 324(4) of B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶29

Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the factual report stating that the parties have amicably settled their dispute by way of compromise and there remains no controversy between the parties.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute in between the parties has been resolved through an amicable settlement and now, there remains no controversy in between them and the parties do not wish to continue the criminal proceedings further.

¶31

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for complainant admits the factum of compromise and submits that he has no objection if the F.I.R. & the proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise entered in between the parties.

¶32

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions made herein-above.

¶33

Heard. Perused the material available on record.

¶34

The parties have resolved their dispute amicably in the spirit of Lok Adalat and do not wish to continue the criminal proceedings and have jointly prayed for quashing of the same. The offence(s)

[2026:RJ-JP:4901]

[CRLMP-8010/2024]

(3 of 3)

alleged in this matter is non-compoundable, however Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] has propounded that if it is convinced that offences are entirely personal in nature and do not affect the public peace or tranquility and where it feels that quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of justice, the High Court should not hesitate to quash the same by exercising the inherent powers vested in it.

¶39

Here in this case, though the offences are noncompoundable but the parties have settled the dispute amicably and that is essential in between the parties which is not affecting public peace & tranquility, therefore, with a view to maintain harmony and to resolve the dispute finally in between the parties, it is deemed appropriate to quash the F.I.R. and all proceedings undertaken in pursuance thereof.

¶40

Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petitions are allowed and the F.I.R. mentioned above and all proceedings undertaken in pursuance thereof, are hereby quashed & set aside. 10. Stay application, also stands disposed of.

¶41

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶42

SAURABH /85-86

Ajay Verma S/O Shaitan, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Verma S/O Shaitan, 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

Ankit Jangir Alias Tonu S/O Anil Kumar Jangid Vs State of Rajasthan

Shahadat Ali S/O Imadad Ali Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwan Singh S/O Amarlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Abdul Vaheed S/O Babu Bhai, Vs State of Rajasthan

Fardeen Khan S/O Farukh Khan, Vs State of Rajasthan

Sonu Kumar Pahadiya Son of Bhagwat Prasad Pahadiya Vs State of Rajasthan