[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Suresh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:20539) on 30 April, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:20539]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1929/2026
1. Suresh Kumar S/o Himmataram, Aged About 33 Years, R/
o Nokh, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
2. Prem Kumar S/o Himmataram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Nokh, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
3. Ramesh Kumar S/o Himmataram, Aged About 32 Years,
R/o Nokh, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
4. Santosh S/o Jetharam, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Nokh,
Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Ganpatram S/o Shri Mishrilal, R/o Nokh, Tehsil Pokaran,
District Jaisalmer Rajasthan.
3. Suresh Kumar S/o Shri Mishrilal, R/o Nokh, Tehsil
Pokaran, District Jaisalmer, Rajasthan. (Injured)
4. Pappuram S/o Shri Haralalaram, R/o Nokh, Tehsil
Pokaran, Distrct Jaisalmer, Rajasthan. (Injured)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh, present in person
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG
Mr. SR Choudhary, PP
Mr. Ganpat Lal Mali, present in person
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
30/04/2026
1. The defects pointed out by office are waived.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed under Section 528 of
BNSS for quashing of proceedings in Session Case No.03/2019
pending in the Court of Additional District and Session Judge,
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 01:53:36 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20539] (2 of 5) [CRLW-1929/2026]
Pokaran, arising out of FIR No.47/2018 registered at Police Station
Nokh, District Jaisalmer for the offences under Sections 143, 341,
323 & 307 of the IPC.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner 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.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.
5. On the other hand, complainant-respondent admits the fact
of compromise and submits that he is willing if the FIR and the
proceedings are quashed on the basis of compromise entered in
between the parties.
6. Heard, 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 by filing a joint application before the trial
court. Some of the offences alleged in this matter are 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
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 01:53:36 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20539] (3 of 5) [CRLW-1929/2026]
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. 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.
7. Here in this case, though there is incorporation of Section
307 of IPC in the report but when viewed from a legal lense, it is
observed that there was no previous animosity between the
parties and they belong to same village and are resident of the
same vicinity. The dispute erupted after hot altercation without
there being pre-meditation, pre-concert or pre-plan. The injuries
are not such so as to cause death of the victim in ordinary course
of nature.
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 01:53:36 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20539] (4 of 5) [CRLW-1929/2026]
8. Suffice it would be to say that neither the circumstances of
the case nor the injuries allegedly received by the victims bringing
the case of the prosecution within the four corners of Section 307
of IPC. The provision above is not wholly dependent upon the
nature of injuries rather several things are to be examined so as
to infer an element of intent of the accused to kill the victim. The
circumstances of the case, the weapon used by the accused, the
part of the body chosen for infliction of injury, the number of
injuries so as to ascertain repeatation and an absolute object,
cause or motive for the accused to make up their mind to end life
of the victim. Since prima facie this Court is convinced that no
offence under Section 307 of IPC is made out, it is felt that the
harmony re-established in between the parties would be disturbed
or unsettled if compromise is not allowed. If it is so, it would
defeat the cause of justice. Maintenance of peace and harmony
among the members of society is the core object of state
authorities and this Court being the constitutional court owes a
duty to vouch safe that the dispute once buried may not be
rejuvenated again by canceling the compromise through legal
arms. Thus, it is deemed appropriate to quash the criminal
proceedings mentioned above as well as any other proceedings
arising out of the above FIR based on compromise.
9. Accordingly, the Petition is allowed and the further
proceedings in Session Case No.03/2019 pending in the Court of
Additional District and Session Judge, Pokaran, arising out of FIR
No.47/2018 registered at Police Station Nokh, District Jaisalmer
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 01:53:36 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:20539] (5 of 5) [CRLW-1929/2026]
are hereby quashed and set aside. The accused are acquitted from
the charges and their bail bonds are discharged.
10. The stay petition also stands disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
48-chhavi/-
(Uploaded on 01/05/2026 at 01:53:36 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
