Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23513 (RAJ)

NATTHU RAM SON OF CH. CHHAMMAN LAL v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/4027/2025 · 2025-07-29

Sameer Jain

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:28653] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4027/2025 1. Natthu Ram Son Of Ch. Chhamman Lal, Resident Of Plot No. 47, Sumit Vihar, Jagatpura, Jaipur. 2. Babulal Son Of Sh. Devilal, Resident Of Plot No. 48-A, Sumit Vihar, Jagatpura, Jaipur. 3. Smt. Shimla Meena Wife Of Sh. Ramkishan Meena, Resident Of Plot No. 51, Sumit Vihar, Jagatpura, Jaipur. 4. Smt. Kamlesh Meena Wife Of Sh. Bharat Singh, Resident Of Village Unapura, Tehsil Veir, District Bharatpur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Rajbahadur Meena Son Of Sh. Kaluram Meena, Resident Of Village Raisana, Tehsil Nadoti, District Karauli. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gulab Chand Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. M. S. Shekhawat, PP with Mr. Manoj Kumar, SHO, Pratap Nagar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 29/07/2025 Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the instant matter, dispute is of civil nature. It is further submitted that petitioner has filed a representation to the concerned JDA. Investigating Officer has marked his presence and has submitted that matter pertains to wrongful encroachment and trespass. It is further submitted that concerned JDA authorities were called and measurements were taken; upon conclusion of the same it was opined that the encroachment was done in [2025:RJ-JP:28653] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-4027/2025] exceeding the plan. It is submitted that initially, a negative FR was filed. In the facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present petition with a direction that investigation be carried out in compliance of the Circular dated 10.06.2025 issued by Director General of Police, Rajasthan. It is made clear that no coercive action be taken against the petitioners, till the conclusion of the investigation. (SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /424