Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Purkha Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:38768) on 28 August, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:38768]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6820/2025
Purkha Ram S/o Shri Gumana Ram, Aged About 57 Years,
Resident Of Village Khari Charnan, Tehsil Kolayat, District
Bikaner (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
2. Om Prakash S/o Shri Rameshwar Lal, Resident Of Khari
Charnan, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner (Rajasthan)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Trilok Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prem Singh Panwar, Public
Prosecutor
Mr. Navneet Poonia for complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
28/08/2025
1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been filed under
Section 482 Cr.PC/528 BNSS on behalf of the petitioner for
quashing of the entire proceeding pending against them arising
out of FIR No.355/2022, registered at Police Station Pradhan
Arakshi Kendra ACB Jaipur, District Bikaner for the offence under
Section 384 of IPC on the ground of compromise.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute in
this matter is inter-se between the parties which does not affect
the societal interest or anyway disturb the tranquility or public
peace. It is further submitted that both the parties have settled
[2025:RJ-JD:38768] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-6820/2025]
their disputes through amicable settlement, for which a
compromise-deed has been executed.
3. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that
the parties have entered into compromise, there remains no
controversy in between them and the parties do not wish to
continue the criminal proceedings further.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the
judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for
complainant-respondent No.2 admits the fact of compromise and
submits that the complainant-respondent No.2 is willing if the FIR
and the proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise
entered in between the parties.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record more particularly the police report,
nature of allegation and the compromise deed executed in
between the parties. The parties to the lis have resolved their
dispute amicably and do not wish to continue the criminal
proceedings and have jointly prayed for quashing of the same.
8. The offence alleged in this matter is non-compoundable,
however, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh
(supra) 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
[2025:RJ-JD:38768] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-6820/2025]
ends of justice, the High Court should not hesitate to quash the
same by exercising the inherent powers vested in it. It is observed
that in such cases, the prosecution becomes a lame prosecution
and pursuing such a lame prosecution would be a waste of time
and energy that will also unsettle the compromise and obstruct
restoration of peace.
9. This court is aptly guided by the principles propounded by
Hon'ble the Supreme Court and feels that where the dispute is
essentially inter se between the parties, either they are relatives,
neighbours or having business relationship and which does not
affect the society at large, then in such cases, with a view to
maintain harmonious relationships between the two sides, to end-
up the dispute in between them permanently as well as for
restitution of relationship, the High Court should exercise its
inherent power to quash the FIR and all other subsequent
proceedings initiated thereto.
10. Here in this case, the offence is not compoundable but the
parties have settled the dispute amicably, the complainant-
respondent No.2 does not wish to continue the proceedings
against the petitioner and, that is essentially in between the
parties, which is not affecting public peace and tranquility,
therefore, with a view to maintain the harmony and to resolve the
dispute finally in between the parties, it is deemed appropriate to
quash the FIR and the entire proceedings undertaken in pursuance
thereof.
11. Accordingly the instant criminal misc. petition is allowed. The
FIR No.355/2022, registered at Police Station Pradhan Arakshi
[2025:RJ-JD:38768] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-6820/2025]
Kendra ACB Jaipur, District Bikaner and all consequential
proceedings thereof are hereby quashed.
12. The accused petitioner is acquitted from the charges and if
he is on bail, his bail bonds are discharged.
13. The stay petition is disposed of.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
76-Ramesh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
