Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2023 DAILYLAW 2381 (RAJ)

HANSRAJ TANWAR SON OF LATE SHRI RAMCHANDRA TANWAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/6227/2023 · 2026-05-11

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2023

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. 6227/2023 1. Hansraj Tanwar Son Of Late Shri Ramchandra Tanwar, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Khatikon Ka Mohalla, Jobner, District Jaipur. 2. Amit Tanwar Son Of Hansraj Tanwar, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Khatikon Ka Mohalla, Jobner, District Jaipur. 3. Ankit Tanwar Son Of Hansraj Tanwar, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Khatikon Ka Mohalla, Jobner, District Jaipur. 4. Smt. Bahrti Wife Of Hansraj Tanwar, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Khatikon Ka Mohalla, Jobner, District Jaipur. 5. Smt. Aarti Wife Of Ankit Tanwar, Resident Of Ward No. 15, Khatikon Ka Mohalla, Jobner, District Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Satyanarayan Son Of Hanuman Prasad, Resident Of Pavera, Police Station Nangal Chaudhary, District Mahendragarh (Haryana), Retired Assistant Sub- Inspector, Police Station Jobner, District Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 11/05/2026 1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 02.03.2023, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambharlake, District Jaipur, by which cognizance has been taken against the petitioners under Sections 186 and 504 IPC. (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6227/2023] 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, a revision petition was submitted by the petitoiners. However, the same was rejected vide impugned order dated 23.08.2023 by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Sambharlake, District Jaipur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after passing of the aforesaid orders, charges have been framed against the petitioner and the petitioners have assailed the order of framing of charge by way of filing a revision petition before the Revisional Court. Counsel submits that a liberty be granted to the petitioners to take all grounds which have been taken before this Court, in the revision petition submitted by the petitioners against the order of framing of charge. 4. The instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of with liberty aforesaid. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/38