Imran Khan vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:10713)
2026 Latest Caselaw 3362 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Imran Khan vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:10713) on 26 February, 2026

[2026:RJ-JD:10713]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1603/2026

Imran Khan S/o Faruk Khan, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Renwal
Jaipur Rural.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Nagma Bano D/o Late Lukman, W/o Imran Khan R/o
         Chaprasiyo Ki Tap, Near Devsthan Vibhag, Jodhpur,rawat
         Hotel Road, Udaimandir, Jodhpur.
                                                                 ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Rajendera Kumar Soni
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Ramesh Dewasi, PP
                                Ms. Arayava Khanan Tanwar for
                                complainant



     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA

Order

26/02/2026

It is respectfully submitted by learned counsel for the

petitioner that another matter, being S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No.

1604/2026, has inadvertently been listed/tagged along with the

present case, though it bears no connection whatsoever with the

present proceedings. It is, therefore, prayed that the aforesaid

matter be detaged and separated from the present case.

2. Upon the request made by learned counsel for the petitioner,

the office is hereby directed to detag the matter being S.B.

Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 1604/2026, which has been listed/tagged

along with the present case, from the present case bearing S.B.

Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 1603/2026.

(Uploaded on 27/02/2026 at 01:19:57 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:10713] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1603/2026]

3. The present Criminal misc. petition is directed against the

FIR No.611/2019, registered at Police Station Udaimandir, District

Jodhpur for the offences under Sections 292 of IPC, 67-A of I.T.

Act and section 4, 6 of the Indecent Representation of Women

(Prohibition) Act.

4. 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.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the

complainant does not dispute the factum of compromise arrived at

between the parties.

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

arrived at between the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to

quash the FIR for establishing peace and harmony between the

parties.

7. The FIR No.611/2019 is hereby quashed.

8. Consequent to follow.

9. Writ petition and also stay petition stands disposed of

accordingly.

(CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA),J 39-Vishal/-

(Uploaded on 27/02/2026 at 01:19:57 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)