HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8688/2024 Chandra Shekhar Son Of Shri Govind Raj Singh, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Sarpanch Deval, Lambaharisingh, Tonk (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Jai Singh S/o Shivraj, R/o Kishanpura, Lamba Harisingh, District Tonk, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahendra Shandilya For Respondent(s) : Mr. JS Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 21/01/2025 1. The instant petition has been preferred for quashing of FIR No.194/2024 registered with the Police Station Lambaharisingh, District Tonk for the offences under Sections 189(2), 190, 115(2), 126(2), 333, 324(4) and 307 of BNS. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a false FIR with vague allegations has been registered against the petitioner, who happens to be the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, at the instance of the defeated candidate, who contested election against the petitioner. Counsel submits that as per the allegations levelled in the FIR, 15 persons came and forcefully snatched the payment of milk i.e. three (2 of 3) [CRLMP-8688/2024] lakh, which were supposed to be distributed by the complainant to the milk sellers. Counsel submits that as per the procedure prescribed for Paayas Milk Producer Company, the payment is required to be made through Bank Accounts and there is no provision of giving cash amount to the milk distributors. Counsel submits that prima facie case appears to be false and fabricated. Counsel submits that even the Police has not found the aforesaid offence under Section 324(4) of BNS proved against the accused persons during the course of investigation. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the Public Prosecutor and perused the contents of the FIR. 5. After going through the contents of the FIR, it appears that the allegations levelled in the FIR disclose commission of cognizable offences, which are required to be investigated. This Court while exercising the discretionary powers contained under Section 528 of BNSS is not supposed to make a roving/fishing inquiry and to embark upon a probe to ascertain the correctness of the allegations levelled in the FIR. Certainly, it would be a task to be undertaken by the Investigating Officer, therefore, this Court does not deem it just and proper to interfere with the course of investigation. 6. The petitioner may file a representation along with the documents in support of his case before the Investigating Officer. (3 of 3) [CRLMP-8688/2024] 7. The Investigating Officer is directed to consider the averments of the same and in case, he comes to the conclusion that a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, he shall ensure the compliance of the mandatory provisions contained under Section 35 of the BNSS. 8. It is made clear that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner for a period of 15 days from today. The Investigating Officer would issue 15 days advance notice to the petitioner, in case his arrest is required. 9. With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/150