HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1542/2025 1. Banwari Lal S/o Dularam, aged about 50 Years, R/o Vil- lage Kishanpura (Ranoli), District Sikar (Rajasthan) 2. Harikishan S/o Bhuraram, aged about 52 Years, R/o Dhani Kanwar Ji, Palsana, District Sikar. 3. Sardar Singh Rathore S/o Late Shri Narpat Singh, aged about 53 Years, R/o Plot No. 304, Subhash Colony, Shas- tri Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, through PP 2. The Director General of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 3. Inspector General of Police, Jaipur Range, Jaipur. 4. The Commissioner, Police Commissionerate, Govt. Hotel, M.I. Road, Jaipur. 5. The SHO, Police Station Sindhi Camp, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Chitrank Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr.Amit Punia, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/03/2026 1. The instant criminal writ petition has been preferred with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that your lordship may graciously be pleased to accept and allow the writ petition and by an appropriate writ, order or direction in nature thereof: (2 of 3) [CRLW-1542/2025] (i) The respondents may kindly be directed to im- mediately vacate the petitioner's property by hand- ing over key of the property to the petitioner. (ii) That respondents may kindly be directed to conduct an inquiry against the concerned erring police official for their illegal act and abuse of power by awarding appropriate compensation to the petitioners for the illegal deprivation of his property and mental agony suffered due to the ar- bitrary actions of the police. (iii) Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper may also be passed in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. By way of filing the instant petition, a prayer has been made for issuing directions to the respondents to vacate the petitioner’s property and hand over the keys of the same to the petitioners along-with the other prayers, which have been sought in the prayer clause of the instant petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that without any authority of law, the respondents have parked certain vehicles on the subject premises of the petitioners and the same were not removed in spite of several requests made by them, hence, under the compelling circumstances, they have approached, this Court by way of filing the instant petition seeking above directions. 4. Per contra, the aforesaid fact has been disputed by the respondents and it was averred before this Court that no vehicle was parked by the respondents rather certain private bus operators/ private vehicle operators have parked their vehicles on the said premises of the petitioners and the same has already been removed from the subject premises, in pursuance of the (3 of 3) [CRLW-1542/2025] orders passed by this Court and videography of the same has already been done. Now, the petitioners are in peaceful possession of the same. Counsel submits that under the changed circumstances, the instant petition has become infructuous. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the arguments put forward by the rival sides, this Court is of the opinion that no one has any authority to park the vehicles on the subject premises, which belong to the petitioners, whatever has been done by whichever authority was totally unwarrated, but looking to the fact that during pendency of the instant petition, vehicles have been removed from the subject premises belonging to the petitioners and peaceful possession of the same has already been handed over to the petitioners, hence, under these circumstances, no further orders are required to be passed. But out of an abundance of caution, a direction is to be issued to all the Authorities not to park any vehicle in the premises of the petitioners in future. 7. The instant petition stands disposed of. All pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /181