[2025:RJ-JP:18256] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2370/2025 Naveen Temani S/o Brijkishore Temani, R/o 42, Shivshankar Nagar, Ajmer Bypass Road, Sanganer Road Ke Pass, Police Station Shyam Nagar, District Jaipur South, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Learned Public Prosecutor 2. Urmila Maharshi W/o Jagdish Chand Kapoor, R/o 2/144, Samudaik Bhavan Ke Samne, Panchsheel Nagar, Ajmer, Krishchyanganj, Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashindra Gautam Mr. Amit Jindal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP with Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 30/04/2025 The present petition is filed with a prayer seeking quashing of FIR No.12/2024 dated 03.12.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Investigating Officer is attempting to implicate the petitioner in the alleged crime solely relying upon the statements tendered by other accused persons. It is further submitted that investigating officer has kept the investigation pending qua the petitioner and has filed charge sheet against the other accused persons. Further, it is submitted that the petitioner is residing in abroad for a prolonged period due to certain medical reasons (Medical Therapy). It is further submitted that in the FIR, no [2025:RJ-JP:18256] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-2370/2025] specific allegations is leveled against the petitioner. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no link between the petitioner and the alleged crime. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, upon perusal of the contents of the FIR, this Court has noted that the complainant is an old lady aged approximately 82 Years who is victim of the Cyber Crime, that father and maternal uncle of the petitioner are arrested for receiving one envelope containing money to exchange the same in crypto currency, that the statement tendered by the witnesses/accused are specifying the name of petitioner in the alleged crime, that the dispute herein pertains to Cyber crime which is an Economic offence, that charge-sheet qua the petitioner is kept in abeyance for the reason that he is residing in abroad. Taking note of the same, this Court is of the opinion that powers under Section 528 of BNSS should be used sparingly and in exceptional circumstances only. Further, relying upon judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Dinesh Sharma vs. Emgee Cables and Communications Ltd. And Anr., registered in SLP (Crl.) No. 10744-10745/2023, finds no reason to interfere with the present petition. The peculiar facts and circumstances of the case warrants investigation. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J DEEPAK/36