Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18322 (RAJ)

NAVAL KISHOR RAIGAR SON OF SHRI JAIRAM RAIGAR v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/2789/2025 · 2025-05-27

Sameer Jain

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:22229] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2789/2025 Naval Kishor Raigar Son Of Shri Jairam Raigar, Resident Of Ambedkar Bas, Tehsil Thanagazi, Basai Jogiyan, Alwar (Rajasthan). ----Accused/Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent 2. Sumit Bhardwaj Son Of Shri Suresh Bhardwaj, Resident Of 210, South West Block, Alwar (Rajasthan) At Present Tehsildar, Mandhan, District Kotputli- Behror (Raj). ----Complainant/Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Singh Raghav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, P.P. with Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 27/05/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petition has been filed seeking directions for quashing of FIR No.51/2025 dated 05.03.2025 for offence under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2) of BNS and Section 66-D of IT (Amendment) Act, 2008. It is further submitted that petitioner is a dignified personality having no record of criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not an employee, therefore, petitioner is not involved in decision making process qua the subject matter of dispute. Further, it is submitted that no co-accused has been specified in the FIR. Additionally, it is submitted that FIR has been lodged [2025:RJ-JP:22229] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-2789/2025] on false and concocted story which is made to be registered on account of vindictive attitude of the complainant who is Tehsildar/public servant. In the facts and circumstances, this Court has noted that the present petition is filed at a pre-mature stage, wherein, investigation is at the nascent stage. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to do microscopic analysis and interfere with the present petition. Howsoever, the petitioner is at liberty to furnish his claim/plea after joining investigation. Investigation authorities on the basis of material statement are at liberty to draw their own inference and conclusion. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J GAURAV/34