Patna High Court
RAJNATH JAISWAL @ RAJU JAISWAL @ RAJU JASWAL @ RAJNATH JASWALversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that the FIR and the ensuing criminal proceedings are quashed as the parties have resolved their dispute through compromise, rendering the case essentially civil in nature.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajnath Jaiswal, was named in an FIR (Danapur PS Case No. 1449 of 2023) for offences under IPC sections 341, 323, 307, 504 and Arms Act section 27. He filed an application seeking quash of the FIR, relying on a compromise petition filed earlier before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, which stated that the complainant could not identify the shooter due to fog and had named the petitioner only because of prior differences. The State and the second opposite party did not contest the existence of the compromise. The High Court, after considering the compromise petition and precedents such as Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Naushey Ali v. State of Uttar Pradesh, and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, held that the dispute was essentially civil in nature and therefore the criminal proceedings should be dismissed. Consequently, the FIR and all related proceedings were quashed. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR can be quashed on the basis of a compromise when the offences alleged are under IPC sections 341, 323, 307, 504 and Arms Act section 27.
- Whether the parties' settlement renders the criminal case of a civil character justifying quashment.
- Whether lack of identification of the actual shooter affects the continuance of the prosecution.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 341, 504
Subjects
- quash of FIR
- compromise petition
- civil character of dispute
- criminal procedure
- non-compoundable offences
- IPC
- Arms Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82934 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1449 Year-2023 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna
======================================================
RAJNATH JAISWAL @ RAJU JAISWAL @ RAJU JASWAL @ RAJNATH
JASWAL LATE BAIJNATH JASWAL ALIAS BAIJNATH PRASAD
JAISWAL Resident of Village- Gabhtal, Akhara Road, Police Station-
Danapur, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Amit Kumar S/o Late Arun Kumar R/o vill - Gabhtal, Akhara road, P.S. -
Danapur, Distt.- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhmay Madhup, Advocate
Mr. Nilabh Ranjan, Advocate
Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The application has been filed for quashing of the
FIR bearing Danapur P.S. Case No. 1449 of 2023 dated
14.11.2023 registered for the offences under Section 341, 323,
307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the
Arms Act pending in the court of the learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate-I, Danapur, Patna.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that he has brought on record Annexure-P-3, which is a
compromise petition which was jointly filed by the parties
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82934 of 2024(5) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
before the court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate-I, Danapur, Patna, wherein they have not only
compromised but also it has specifically been stated in
paragraph-4 thereof that the complainant could not see as to
who had shot him as there was fog and due to earlier
differences, the complainant has given the name of the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 does not dispute the
factum of compromise entered into between the parties and has
supported the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and taking into account Annexure-P-3, which is a compromise
petition as also considering various judicial pronouncements, i n
cases of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10
SCC 303, Naushey Ali and Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and
Anr. reported in (2025) 4 SCC 78 and Narinder Singh and Ors.
vs. State of Punjab and Anr reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466,
paragraph -29.4 of the same reads as under:
“29.4. On the other hand, those criminal
cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil
character, particularly those arising out of commercial
transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship
or family disputes should be quashed when the parties
have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.”
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82934 of 2024(5) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
6. In view of the above, the FIR bearing Danapur P.S.
Case No. 1449 of 2023 dated 14.11.2023, the entire criminal
proceedings therefrom is, hereby, quashed.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
krishna/-
U T
Checking your session…