Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3268 (RAJ)

VINAY KUMAR ALLEGED ADOPTED SON OF ROOP NARAYAN v. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CCP/45/2025 · 2025-09-17

Ganesh Ram Meena

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:37885] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 45/2025 Vinay Kumar Alleged Adopted Son Of Roop Narayan, Resident Of Uniyara, Tehsil Uniyara, District Tonk ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 2. Ramakant S/o Brajratan, Resident Of Nainwa, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi 3. Bajendra Son Of Brajratan, Resident Of Nainwa, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi 4. Vedprakash S/o Brajratan, Resident Of Nainwa, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi 5. Alankriti D/o Shri Brajratan, Resident Of Nainwa, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi 6. Madhu Devi W/o Shri Brajratan, Resident Of Nainwa, Tehsil Nainwa, District Bundi 7. Uganti Devi W/o Babulal, D/o Kanhaiyalal, Resident Of Shivad, Tehsil And District Sawai Madhopur 8. Suganta Devi W/o Rameshchand, D/o Kanhaiyalal, Resident Of Shivad, Tehsil And District Sawai Madhopur 9. Radha Devi W/o Sanjay Sharma, D/o Kanaiyalal, Resident Of Deoli, District Tonk 10. Rekha Rani W/o Girdhargapal, D/o Kanhaiyalal, Resident Of Deoli, District Tonk 11. Nandrani W/o Rajesh, D/o Kanhaiyalal, Resident Of Chhavani Tonk, Tehsil And District Tonk 12. Ashrani W/o Mahesh D/o Kanhaiyalal, Resident Of Diggi, Tehsil Malpura, District Tonk 13. Urmila W/o Manoj, D/o Kanhaiyalal, Presently Residing At Rajmahal, Tehsil Deoli, District Tonk 14. Praveen Kumar Saini, Tehsildar, Tehsil-Uniyara, District Tonk ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order [2025:RJ-JP:37885] (2 of 3) [CCP-45/2025] 17/09/2025 1. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging violation of the order dated 13.02.2024 passed by the Court in SBCWP No.1364/2024. 2. Heard. Considered. 3. By interim order dated 13.02.2024, the Court ordered to maintain the status quo as regards the subject property till further orders. 4. It is averred by the petitioner that after the interim order of status quo as regards the suit property, the private respondent Nos.2 to 14, on 05.10.2024 and 09.10.2024 ran tractor for the purpose of cultivation over the subject land and tried to get possession over the said land despite the order of status quo by the Court. 5. As per the averments made in the contempt petition, the petitioner also lodged a criminal case No.248/2024 on 10.10.2024 at Police Station Uniyara, District Tonk with the allegation against the private respondents of entering into the subject land on 05.10.2024 and 09.10.2024 with the tractor. 6. On a query put to the counsel for the petitioner as regards the status of the investigation of the aforesaid case, he submitted that after completion of investigation the Police has submitted Final Negative Report in the matter. 7. Once the petitioner has lodged a criminal case as regards the allegation of entering into the subject land even after the order of status quo by the Court and the Police has submitted Final Negative Report after completion of investigation, it means that [2025:RJ-JP:37885] (3 of 3) [CCP-45/2025] the allegation averred in the contempt petition have been found to be false by the Police in their investigation. 8. As regards the allegation made in the present contempt petition of entering into the subject land on 05.10.2024 and 09.10.2024, this Court has no mechanism to go into the investigation of the allegation. However, the Court can only consider the reports of the state agencies as regards such allegation. In the present case, the Police has also submitted the Final Negative Report as regard the allegations which has been made in this contempt petition. 9. In view of the fact that the Police has already submitted Final Negative Report as regards the allegation made by the petitioner in the present contempt petition, this Court is of the opinion that no contempt is made out against the respondents. 10. Accordingly, this contempt petition is dismissed at this stage. 11. Notices discharged. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Gaurav Srivastava/Satyendra/43