Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Bangali Mal Goyal vs Jaipur Development Authority on 17 May, 2022
Author: Birendra Kumar
Bench: Birendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5329/2017
Bangali Mal Goyal S/o Late Shri Basti Ram Goyal, R/o E-29,
Hanuman Path, Shyam Nagar Vistar, New Sanganer Road, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
Jaipur Development Authority Through Its Enforcement Officer,
Zone No.5, JLN Marg, Jaipur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.P. Gupta
Mr. Vivek Goyal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Virendra Lodha, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Rachit Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
Order
17/05/2022
The brief fact leading to this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is that the Jaipur Development Authority issued notice against the petitioner dated 26.06.2004 asking the petitioner to file reply till 30.06.2014 in respect of the referred encroachments made as well as for violation of building by laws while making construction of house by the petitioner. A copy of the notice is at page 18. The petitioner submitted his reply dated 30.06.2014, a copy at page 19 to 26.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without passing any order on reply of the petitioner, the Jaipur Development Authority filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner in violation of sub-section 6 of Section 32 of the JDA Act, which provides that the reply of the petitioner should have (Downloaded on 20/05/2022 at 09:10:21 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLMP-5329/2017] been disposed of first and then only step for prosecution of the petitioner could have been taken.
Submission is that the complaint was itself without jurisdiction, hence order of cognizance dated 12.11.2014 for offence(s) under Sections 31(1) and 32(7) of the JDA Act was bad in law.
Further submission is that the petitioner filed an application before the court below for discharge and dropping the criminal proceeding which was refused by impugned order dated 28.08.2017 passed in Case No.128/2014.
Parties do not dispute the factual and legal scenario appearing in this case to the extent that without disposal of response of the petitioner, the criminal prosecution could not have been initiated in view of the statutory requirement under Section 32(6) of the JDA Act. Therefore, entire criminal prosecution suffers from non-application of the provisions of law.
Hence, in the ends of justice, the entire criminal prosecution including the impugned order stands hereby quashed and this petition stands allowed accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J Hemant/68 (Downloaded on 20/05/2022 at 09:10:21 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)