HARLAL BANJARA S/O SH. DHANNA LAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/1503/2025 · 2025-05-26
Praveer Bhatnagar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 10954 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 10954 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:22097] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1503/2025 Harlal Banjara S/o Sh. Dhanna Lal, S/o Sh. Dhanna Lal, Aged About 78 Years, R/o Dabi, Tehsil Talera, Dist. Bundi (Raj). Through Power Of Attorney Maroof Ahmed S/o Sh. Makbool Ahmed, R/o Ward No. 04, Near Post Office, Dabi, Tehsil Talera, Dist. Bundi (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
2. The Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Inspector General Of Police, Kota Division, Kota (Raj).
4. The Superintendent Of Police, District Bundi (Raj).
5. The Station House Officer, Police Station , Dabi, District Bundi (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Brahma Prakash For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shri Ram Dakhar, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 26/05/2025
1. The instant petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS for fair and impartial investigation in connection with FIR No.132/2024 registered at Police Station Dabi, District Bundi for the offence under Sections 447, 384, 506 and 34 of IPC.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that police did not investigate the matter fairly and properly. The petitioner is the owner of the land and the respondents have trespassed upon the said land. Therefore, the police authorities be directed to conduct a fair and impartial investigation.
[2025:RJ-JP:22097] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1503/2025]
3. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the factual report dated 31.03.2025, whereby it is mentioned that dispute between the parties is civil in nature and proposed the final report No.56 dated 24.12.2024 before the concerned Court.
4. Heard and perused the material available on record.
5. The Court cannot held trial at this stage and inquire about whether the respondents have trespassed upon the land of the petitioner or not. This is purely a question which is to be inquired into by the concerned Trial Court.
6. Be that as it may, the petitioner is free to avail the remedy by filing a petition before the concerned court after filing of the final negative report.
7. Accordingly, with the observations made above, the present petition is disposed of.
8. All pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J HEENA/11