Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2021 DAILYLAW 2435 (RAJ)

SHRIPHOOL SON OF SHIBBURAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/8311/2021 · 2026-03-28

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2021

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. 8311/2021 Shriphool S/o Shibburam, R/o Shop No. 143, Mandir Trust in front of Badi Dharmasala, Kailadevi, Tehsil And District Karauli. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through P.P. 2. S.K Sharma S/o Shri Jagannath Prasad, Jr. Engineer (Vigilance) Jaipur Discom, Karauli. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr.Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 28/03/2026 1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned F.I.R. No.276/2021 registered at the Police Station Prevention of Electricity Karauli, District Karauli for the offences punishable under Section 135 of the Electricity Act. 2. It has been averred in the instant petition that the petitioner is innocent and he has no concerned whatsoever with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It has also been averred in the instant petition that the matter pertains to the Mandir Trust and this fact has been made clear from the electricity bill of the Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, hence, prayer has been made for quashing the proceedings of the impugned F.I.R. and interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer. (2 of 2) [CRLMP-8311/2021] 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. The contents of the instant petition and the allegations levelled therein against the petitioner reveals commission of cognizable offence and the correctness of the allegations cannot be examined and adjudicated by this Court at this stage, while exercising inherent jurisdiction contained under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and certainly, this task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of this case, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant criminal misc. petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation before the Investigating Officer and it is expected from the concerned Investigating Officer to consider the same and submit the conclusion report of the investigation under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and before doing so, he would issue a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. to the petitioner. 7. This order will come into effect only if the investigation is still lying pending or ongoing, in case, after investigation, charge- sheet has been submitted, then the petitioner would be at liberty to take all available defence/ grounds which have been taken before this Court, at the appropriate stage of the trial. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /33