Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2022 DAILYLAW 3064 (RAJ)

BANWARI LAL MEENA S/O DEVKARAN MEENA, v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/1732/2022 · 2026-04-16

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2022

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. 1732/2022 Banwari Lal Meena S/o Devkaran Meena, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Bhajera, District Alwar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pallav Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 16/04/2026 1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made to quash the impugned FIR No.309/2019 registered with the Police Station Reni, District Alwar for the offences punishable under Section 376, 323 and 506 IPC. 2. Perusal of the record indicates that after thorough investigation in the instant matter, final report negative was submitted by the Investigating Agency in favour of the petitioner. The order-sheet dated 18.12.2020 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh, Alwar indicates that notices were issued to the complainant and after issuance of notice she appeared before the Court below and sought time for filing protest petition and thereafter, the case was posted for the next date. 3. In the considered opinion of this Court, the instant criminal misc. petition has become infructuous, as final report has already been submitted in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner has no (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1732/2022] right to intervene at this stage, where the final report has already been submitted and the prosecutrix has sought time to submit protest petition. 4. It is settled proposition of law that before the stage of taking cognizance or rather at the stage of taking cognizance, the accused has no locus standi to challenge in between the process. 5. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands dismissed. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand dismissed. 6. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to assail the order of cognizance, if any, taken against him by way of filing an appropriate application before the appropriate court of law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/9