Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2019 DAILYLAW 3191 (RAJ)

SMT HANSRAJ KANWAR W/O SHRI NARPAT SINGH B/C RAJPUT v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/3370/2019 · 2026-03-23

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2019

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3370/2019 1. Smt Hansraj Kanwar W/o Shri Narpat Singh B/c Rajput, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Village Kudoli, Post Pidwa, Police Station Khunkhuna, District Nagaur. 2. Ravindra Singh S/o Shri Narpat Singh B/c Rajput, R/o Village Kudoli, Post Pidwa, Police Station Khunkhuna, District Nagaur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp. 2. Gaurav Singh Rathore S/o Shri Himmat Singh, R/o Plot No.69, Officers Campus Extension, Sirsi Road, Jaipur. 3. Mahendra Singh Shekhawat, Sub Inspector, Police Station Kardhani, District Jaipur West (Investigating Officer Of Fir No.360/2019). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anukram Singh Ms. Dipika Jallandra for Mr. Amit Jindal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary-PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 23/03/2026 By way of filing the instant petition, a prayer has been led to quash the impugned FIR No. 360/2019 registered with the Police Station Kardhani, District Jaipur (West) for the offences under Sections 143 and 452 IPC. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are in possession of the subject land and on the basis of the JDA Patta, a false and fabricated FIR has been lodged by the complainant party (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3370/2019] against the petitioners with vague allegations, infact the petitioners have not committed any offence. Hence, interference of this Court is warranted. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer made by counsel for the petitioners. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. Contents of the impugned FIR reveals commission of a cognizable offence and the correctness of the allegations cannot be adjudged by this Court while exercising inherent powers contained under Section 482Cr.P.C. Certainly, this task has been assigned to the Investigating Agency. In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioners would be at liberty to submit a representation along with the documents in support of their contentions before the Investigating Officer who shall considered the same and in case, he comes to the conclusion that a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners then he would issue a notice under Section 41-A [35(3) of the BNSS] to the petitioners. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/2