[2025:RJ-JP:38343] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 817/2024 Jaggo Son Of Shri Ramswarop, Aged About 77 Years, Resident Of Harijan Basti,amba Cinema Ke Paas, Gangabag,kasba Bayana, Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Suresh Kumar Ola, Director, Directorate Of Local Bodies, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. U.r. Sahu, Director General Of Police, Jaipur (Raj). 3. Mridul Kachhawa, Superintenent Of Police, Bharatpur, District Bharatpur (Raj). 4. Babu Lal Station House Officer, Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj). 5. Sapna Dauther Of Ramesh Chand Wife Of Nirbhay Singh, Resident Of Tulsivan Road Girls School Ke Samne, Baadi, Tehsil Baadi, District Dholpur, At Present Resident Of S.n. Multispeciality Hospital, Opposite Reliance Petrol Pump, Shyam Sarovar Coony, Bayana, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur. 6. Jyoti Prakash Son Of Shri Jaggo, Resident Of Harijan Basti, Amba Cinema Ke Pass, Gangabag, Kasba Bayana, Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj). 7. Shashi Wife Of Jyoti Prakash, Resident Of Harijan Basti, Amba Cinema Ke Pass, Gangabag, Kasba Bayana, Police Station Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Karanpal Singh For Respondent(s) : Ms. Almas Khanam on behalf of Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG Ms. Diksha Meena with Mr. Sumit Kumar Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 18/09/2025 1. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging non-compliance of order dated 19.07.2024, passed in SBCWP No. 1502/2024. [2025:RJ-JP:38343] (2 of 2) [CCP-817/2024] 2. By order dated 19.07.2024, the Court directed the petitioner to file a representation before the Station House Officer, Police Station Bayana, District Baratpur, Rajasthan on 26.07.2024 encapsulating his perceived apprehensions and/or threats, within an upper period of seven days and the respondent No. 4 shall consider the same within an upper period of seven days from the date of receiving of such representation, after exercising due application of mind and analysing the merits of the perceived threat. It was also observed that only after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the SHO would decide whether protection was to be granted or not or if any alternative arrangements are required to be made. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that on receiving the representation from the petitioner in view of the directions of the Court, the respondent after making an inquiry, filed a complaint under Section 126/235 of BNSS against respondent Nos. 5 & 7. Counsel has also placed on record the order of issuance of notices to the aforesaid respondents to bound down them for peace, law and order. 4. In view of the aforesaid fact, the Court is of the opinion that the substantial compliance of the Court's order has been made. Accordingly, this contempt petition is disposed of. 6. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail all remedies available to him under law as regards any grievance apart from the direction issued by the Court. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava/Satyendra/62