Jasvinder Singh vs State Of Rajasthan
2026 Latest Caselaw 2153 Raj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2153 Raj
Judgement Date : 10 February, 2026

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Jasvinder Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 10 February, 2026

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
              S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 9792/2025

1.     Jasvinder Singh S/o Shri Darban Singh, Aged About 58
       Years, Resident Of Ward No. - 4, 19 Gb, Gram Panchayat-
       17 Gb, Post-19 Gb, Tehsil Sri Vijaynagar, 19 Gb, District
       Sri Ganganagar Rajasthan
2.     Chhinder Singh S/o Ajamer Singh, Aged About 58 Years,
       Resident Of Village 15 Bgd, P.o. Vilochia, 15 Bgd,
       Ganganagar, District Sri Ganganagar Rajasthan
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor
2.     Sri Indraj S/o Shri Motaram, Resident Of 29 Gb Shivpuri,
       Sri Vijaynagar, District Sri Ganganagar Rajasthan
                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Trilok Joshi
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Pawan Kumar Bhati, PP
                               Mr. Navneet Punia


    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Order 10/02/2026 The instant criminal misc. petition has been filed by the

petitioners under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing of the

F.I.R. No.107/2025 registered at Police Station Sri Vijaynagar,

District Sri Ganganagar, for offences punishable under Sections

115(2), 126(2) & 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) &

3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that

compromise has been arrived at between the parties and the

matter has been settled amicably.

Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 does not dispute

the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties.

(Uploaded on 17/02/2026 at 06:44:27 PM)

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-9792/2025]

The Hon'ble Apex Court while answering a reference in the

case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in JT

2012(9) SC - 426 has held as below:-

"57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or

(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime.

Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the

(Uploaded on 17/02/2026 at 06:44:27 PM)

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-9792/2025]

offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding." Keeping in view the observations made by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in Gian Singh's case (supra), this Court is of the

opinion that it is a fit case, wherein the criminal proceedings

pending against the petitioners can be quashed while exercising

powers under Section 528 BNSS.

Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed. The F.I.R.

No.107/2025 registered at Police Station Sri Vijaynagar, District

Sri Ganganagar against the petitioners for the offences under

Sections 115(2), 126(2) & 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(2)(va),

3(1)(r) & 3(1)(s) of SC/ST Act and all other subsequent

proceedings sought to be taken thereunder are hereby quashed

and set aside.

All pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.