Paburam vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:10398)
2026 Latest Caselaw 3360 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Paburam vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:10398) on 26 February, 2026

[2026:RJ-JD:10398]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1559/2026

1.       Paburam S/o Laxmanram, Aged About 55 Years, Karda
         Tehsil Raniwara Dist Jalore Raj.
2.       Kewaram S/o Laxmanram, Aged About 35 Years, Karda
         Tehsil Raniwara Dist Jalore Raj.
3.       Ranaram S/o Laxmanram, Aged About 45 Years, Karda
         Tehsil Raniwara Dist Jalore Raj.
4.       Manglaram S/o Hajaram, Aged About 31 Years, Karda
         Tehsil Raniwara Dist Jalore Raj.
5.       Mahendra S/o Hajaram, Aged About 27 Years, Karda
         Tehsil Raniwara Dist Jalore Raj.
6.       Kheemaram S/o Madharam, Aged About 44 Years, Karda
         Tehsil Raniwara Dist Jalore Raj.
7.       Bharat Kumar S/o Sawaram, Aged About 32 Years, Karda
         Tehsil Raniwara Dist Jalore Raj.
                                                                   ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Virma Ram S/o Sujanaram, Karada Police Station Karada
         Tehsil Raniwara Dist Jalore Raj
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Teja Ram
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Vikram Singh Rajput, PP with
                                Mr. Ravinder Singh Rathore
                                Ms. Khushi Sharma for complainant



     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA

Order

26/02/2026

The present Criminal misc. petition is directed against the

FIR No.42/2025, registered at Police Station Karada, District Jalore

for the offences under Sections 191(2), 126(2), 127(2), 115(2)

and 304(2) of BNS.

(Uploaded on 27/02/2026 at 02:08:04 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:10398] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1559/2026]

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the

pendency of the investigation, the petitioners have entered into

compromise with the complainant and the said compromise has

been produced before the Investigating Officer, who has verified

the same.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor, on the basis of factual report,

informs that the parties have entered into compromise.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant does not dispute the

factum of compromise arrived at between the parties.

5. Having regard to the fact that the compromise have been

arrived at between the parties and this Court deems it appropriate

to quash the FIR for establishing peace and harmony between the

parties.

6. The FIR No.42/2025 is hereby quashed.

7. Consequent to follow.

8. Writ petition and also stay petition stands disposed of

accordingly.

(CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA),J 4-Vishal/-

(Uploaded on 27/02/2026 at 02:08:04 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)