Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Manohar Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:39578)
2025 Latest Caselaw 12681 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 12681 Raj
Judgement Date : 4 September, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Manohar Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:39578) on 4 September, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:39578]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6759/2025

1.       Manohar Singh S/o Shri Indra Singh, Aged About 47
         Years, Resident Of Kachwaha Nagar, Chokha, Rajiv Gandhi
         Nagar Police Station, Jodhpur (Raj.)
2.       Surendra Singh S/o Shri Indra Singh,, Aged About 45
         Years, Resident Of Kachwaha Nagar, Chokha, Rajiv Gandhi
         Nagar Police Station, Jodhpur (Raj.)
3.       Gajendra S/o Shri Manohar Singh, Aged About 25 Years,
         Resident Of Kachwaha Nagar, Chokha, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar
         Police Station, Jodhpur (Raj.)
4.       Bhavesh S/o Shri Manohar Singh, Aged About 23 Years,
         Resident Of Kachwaha Nagar, Chokha, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar
         Police Station, Jodhpur (Raj.)
5.       Biram Singh S/o Shri Indra Singh, Aged About 44 Years,
         Resident Of Kachwaha Nagar, Chokha, Rajiv Gandhi Nagar
         Police Station, Jodhpur (Raj)
                                                                   ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
2.       Maksud Alam S/o Shri Jamal Alam, Aged About 35 Years,
         Resident Of Lordi Dejgara, Jhanwar, Jodhpur (Raj)
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Akshay Surana & Mr. Tarun Dudia
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Narendra Singh Chandawat, PP
                                Mr. Parwat Singh Rathore & Mr.
                                Kuldeep Singh Kumpawat for
                                complainant



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

04/09/2025

1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been filed under

Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 BNSS on behalf of the petitioners for

quashing of the entire proceeding pending against them arising

(Uploaded on 08/09/2025 at 03:02:24 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:39578] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-6759/2025]

out of FIR No.161/2025, registered at Police Station Rajiv Gandhi

Nagar, Jodhpur, District - Jodhpur City West for the offences under

Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 126(2) & 110 of BNS on

the ground of compromise.

2. In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court vide order

dated 22.08.2025, the parties have appeared before the

Investigating Officer and submitted their compromise before him.

3. As per the report dated 03.09.2025, sent by the SHO, P.S.

Rajiv Nagar, Jodhpur City West, the parties have appeared before

the Investigating Officer and submitted their compromise. The

report is taken on record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners 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

their disputes through amicable settlement, for which a

compromise-deed has been executed.

5. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners

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.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners 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.

7. 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

(Uploaded on 08/09/2025 at 03:02:24 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:39578] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-6759/2025]

and the proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise

entered in between the parties.

8. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition but does

not refute the fact of compromise having been entered into the

parties.

9. 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.

10. Some of the offences alleged in this matter are 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 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.

11. This court is aptly guided by the principles propounded by

the Hon'ble 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

(Uploaded on 08/09/2025 at 03:02:24 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:39578] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-6759/2025]

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.

12. Here in this case, though some of the offences are not

compoundable but the parties have settled the dispute amicably,

the complainant-respondent No.2 do not wish to continue the

proceedings against the petitioners 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.

13. Accordingly the instant criminal misc. petition is allowed. The

FIR No.161/2025, registered at Police Station Rajiv Gandhi Nagar,

Jodhpur, District - Jodhpur City West and all consequential

proceedings for offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190,

115(2), 126(2) & 110 of BNS against the petitioners are hereby

quashed.

14. The stay petition also stands disposed of.

(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J 111-Ramesh/-

(Uploaded on 08/09/2025 at 03:02:24 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter