Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Vivek Gupta Son Of Mahesh Kumar Gupta vs State Of Rajasthan on 22 January, 2021
Author: Satish Kumar Sharma
Bench: Satish Kumar Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 513/2021
1. Vivek Gupta Son Of Mahesh Kumar Gupta, Aged About 32
Years, Resident Of Village Khadab Tehsil Kotputli District
Jaipur.
2. Mahesh Kumar Gupta Son Of Bhagwandas Gupta, Aged
About 54 Years, Resident Of Village Khadab Tehsil Kotputli
District Jaipur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
2. Ajay Singh Tanwar Son Of Shri Krishan Singh, Resident Of
Narehda, Tehsil Kotputli District Kotputli, Jaipur.
3. Laxminarayan Yadav Son Of Dhudaram, Resident Of
Narehda, Tehsil Kotputli District Kotputli, Jaipur.
4. Rajesh Gurjar Son Of Rameshwar Gurjar, Resident Of
Khadab, Tehsil Kotputli District Kotputli, Jaipur.
5. Ramotar Son Of Arjunlal, Resident Of Narehda, Tehsil
Kotputli District Kotputli, Jaipur.
6. Bimla Devi Wife Of Gugan Singh, Resident Of Narehda,
Tehsil Kotputli District Kotputli, Jaipur.
7. Sharmila Devi Wife Of Kripal Singh, Resident Of Vilage
Ranot, Tehsil Mundawar, District Alwar.
8. Ram Singh Yadav Son Of Hanuman, Residsent Of Village
Gopipura, Tehsil Kotputli District Jaipur.
9. Udai Pancholi @ Prabhakar Son Of Charu Chander,
Resident Of 33-A Saheli Nagar, Udaipur, At Present
Residing At Village Narehda, Tehsil Kotputli District Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jai Raj Tantia
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Chaudhary, PP
Mr. N.S. Shekhawat
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR SHARMA
Order
(Downloaded on 22/01/2021 at 10:29:37 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-513/2021]
22/01/2021
1. This Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.457/2016 registered at Police Station Kotputli District Jaipur for offences under Sections 420 and 406 IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the material made available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the compromise has been arrived at between the parties and the complainant party has given affidavit to this effect. Therefore, the impugned FIR deserves to be quashed qua the present petitioners. Therefore, further investigation in the matter should be stayed qua the petitioners and they should be granted interim protection from any sort of coercive action.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that terms of compromise have not been fulfilled by the accused persons. The petition deserves to be dismissed.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that appropriate directions may be issued.
6. Since the contents of FIR prima facie constitute cognizable offence, the other alleged grounds for quashing of the impugned FIR as per the legal position as expounded in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal: [1992 (supp)1 SCC 335] can only be disclosed after due investigation. Further, as per P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement: [(2019) 9 SCC 24] the investigation is in the domain of the Investigating Agency and the courts are not supposed to interfere in the investigation. At the same time the accused is entitled to avail due legal remedies available to him for protection of his/ her personal liberty. (Downloaded on 22/01/2021 at 10:29:37 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-513/2021]
7. Therefore, in light of above legal position, it is not appropriate to stay the investigation in the matter, however, having regard to the above submissions and the controversy involved, but without expressing any opinion on merits, it is directed that the investigation shall continue and the present petitioners shall join the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 1-2-2021 and as and when they are called upon to do so. After completion of investigation, the police report (challan/ FR) shall be presented before the concerned court. However, the present petitioners shall not be arrested without prior notice of seven days.
8. It is made clear that in case the accused petitioner/s fail to join the investigation, the Investigating Officer shall be free to arrest him/ them forthwith, if so required, subject to bail order, if any.
9. Learned Public Prosecutor is directed to call for the status report of the investigation along with the case diary.
10. List the matter on 15-2-2021.
(SATISH KUMAR SHARMA),J Arun/86 (Downloaded on 22/01/2021 at 10:29:37 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)