[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rajendra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:11536) on 10 March, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:11536]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1834/2026
Rajendra Singh S/o Raghunath Singh, Aged About 39 Years,
Resident Of Village Hudeel District Deedwana Kuchaman
Rajasthan
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Hemu Kanwar W/o Rajendra Singh, Aged About 35 Years,
Doughter Of Chandra Singh Resident Of Village Hudeel
District Deedwana Kuchaman At Present Resident Of
Purohito Ka Bas Maderna Colony Mata Ka Than Jodhpur
Rajasthan
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deependra Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. V.S. Rajpurohit, PP
Mr. Jaipal Singh
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU
Order
10/03/2026
The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 528 of
BNSS has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of
proceedings in Criminal Regular Case No.2240/2026 (arising out
of FIR No.33/2024, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana
(Jodhpur City East), District Jodhpur City East) pending before the
Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.2, Jodhpur for the
offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 323 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the
present matter, the complainant lodged an FIR against the
petitioner for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 323
(Uploaded on 10/03/2026 at 03:23:44 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:11536] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-1834/2026]
IPC, pursuant to which the police conducted investigation and filed
the charge-sheet before the learned trial court. Learned counsel
further submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the
petitioner and the complainant have amicably settled their dispute
and entered into a compromise agreement dated 19.12.2025. It is
submitted that on the basis of the said compromise, the learned
trial court has already acquitted the petitioner for the offences
under Sections 406 and 323 IPC, however, the compromise was
not considered with regard to the offence under Section 498-A
IPC. Learned counsel therefore prays that in view of the
compromise arrived at between the parties, the FIR No. 33/2024
registered at Mahila Police Station, Jodhpur East, Jodhpur and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom may kindly be
quashed and set aside. The compromise agreement has been
placed on record.
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
(Uploaded on 10/03/2026 at 03:23:44 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:11536] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-1834/2026]
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 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 petitioner can be quashed while exercising
powers under Section 528 of BNSS.
(Uploaded on 10/03/2026 at 03:23:44 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:11536] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-1834/2026]
Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed. The
proceedings in Criminal Regular Case No.2240/2026 pending
before the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.2, Jodhpur
for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 323 IPC, arising
out of FIR No.33/2024, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana
(Jodhpur City East), District Jodhpur City East and all subsequent
criminal proceedings sought to be taken thereunder against the
petitioner are hereby quashed.
Stay petition and all pending application(s), if any, stand
disposed of.
(BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J
236-Hanuman/-
(Uploaded on 10/03/2026 at 03:23:44 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
