Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Pushkar vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 16 September, 2017
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 297 / 2015
Pushkar S/o Jagdish, aged 18 years, R/o Village Kodapura, PS
Ghari Bajna, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan)0
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Fahad Hassan Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.R. Gurjar, P.P. _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Judgment 23/08/2017 Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking quashing of the FIR No. 384/2014 registered at Police Station Bayana District Bharatpur for the offence under Section 33, 41 and 42 of Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the head note of the petition, it has been inadvertently mentioned that FIR has been registered at Police Station Bayana District Bharatpur for the offence under Sections 2(26)(27)(29) of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 whereas the FIR has been registered only qua offence under sections 33, 41 and 42 of Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this petition is covered by the decision given by this court in SB Cr. Misc. Petition No. 2002/2015 titled as Mousam Khan Vs. State of Raj. & Anr. Decided on 29.04.2015.
Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the petition.
(2 of 2) [CRLMP-297/2015] Mousam Khan has sought quashing of the FIR registered against him by filling SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.2002/2015. The said petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2015. It was held as under:-
"Thus, it is apparent that offence under section 41/42 of the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 is non-cognizable offence and petitioner can only be prosecuted by filling a complaint by the authorised/competent Officer. No FIR in the present case, could have been registered. Further, Police Officer concerned has not obtained permission from the Magistrate concerned for investigation of the offence.
In view of the above, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of the impugned FIR cannot be sustained and are liable to be set aside. Consequently, the present petition is accepted and the impugned FIR is quashed along with all subsequent proceedings. However, liberty is granted to the competent authorised Officer to file a complaint in accordance with the provisions of law, if it is not barred by limitation."
Present case is covered by the decision given by this Court in SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.2002/2015 decided on 29.04.2015.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Consequently, FIR No. FIR No. 384/2014 registered at Police Station Bayana District Bharatpur for the offence under Section 33, 41 and 42 of Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. However, complainant would be at liberty to file a complaint with regard to alleged offence, if so advised.
(SABINA) J.
S.Kumawat/D-62