[2025:RJ-JP:27756] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3827/2025 Ramkala Wife Of Laxminarayan, Aged About 60 Years, Residents Of Bolkheda, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The P.p. 2. Rajpal Singh S/o Ramlal Yadav, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Alamshah Present Medical Officer, Government Hospital, Kaman (Deeg) Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harendra Singh Sinsinwar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP Mr. Rajeev Surana, sr. adv. with Mr. Umang Jain Ms. Muskan Verma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 24/07/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that present FIR is lodged by the son-in-law against the petitioner, who is a senior citizen. It is further submitted that in the year 2021, petitioners’ daughter and respondent No.2’s wife had died. It is further submitted that there is a joint property registered in the name of the petitioner and his daughter and there was a dispute qua the issuance of possession letter by the corporation. Furthermore, it is submitted that some rental disputes are also ongoing before the concerned Tribunal. [2025:RJ-JP:27756] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3827/2025] Additionally, it is submitted that FIR is lodged with false and concocted narrative at the belated stage in the year 2025. Further, it is submitted that matter pertains to a civil dispute. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- husband has stoutly opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that despite the presence of legal heirs i.e. children of deceased- Gyanesh and her husband, pattas’ were issued in the name of petitioner, fraudulently. Having heard and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, taking note of the fact that the petitioner is a senior citizen and the dispute is inter-se the son-in-law and the mother-in-law, that disputed questions of facts are involved in the instant matter, thus this Court finds no reason to interfere in the instant matter as the matter requires investigation. Therefore petitioner/ accused is directed to participate in the investigation. It is further directed that no coercive action be taken against the petitioner till submission of outcome of the investigation. In light of the above, the present petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed. (SAMEER JAIN),J DEEPAK/36