SAGUFTA JAMIDAR D/O NAEMUDEEN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMP/6911/2024 · 2025-12-09
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 40822 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 40822 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:49913] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6911/2024
1. Sagufta Jamidar D/o Naemudeen, R/o Mohalla Jamidaran, Sikar, Kotwali, Sikar, Rajasthan.
2. Amir Sohil Jamidar S/o Naemudeen, R/o Mohalla Jamidaran, Sikar, Kotwali, Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Petitioners Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor.
2. Mohammad Sahrukh S/o Mohammad Farukh, R/o Mohalla Narwan, Near Vikram School, Ward No. 19, Sikar, Police Station Kotwali, Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr.Amit Punia, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 09/12/2025
1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned F.I.R. No.696/2023 registered at the Police Station Kotwali Sikar, District Sikar for the offence under Sections 420, 406 & 120-B of IPC.
2. The contents of the instant petition indicates that the grounds mentioned therein that the petitioners have not committed any offence whatsoever still they have been false implicated in the instant case, therefore, a prayer has been made to quash the entire proceedings arising out of the impugned F.I.R.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer raised by counsel for the petitioners and submitted that the
[2025:RJ-JP:49913] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6911/2024] allegations levelled in the impugned F.I.R. reveal commission of a cognizable offence and the same is required to be investigated by the Investigating Agency, hence, interference of this Court is not warranted and the petition filed by the petitioners is liable to rejected.
4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record.
5. This Court while exercising its inherent powers contained under Section 528 of the BNSS and the facts are required to be investigated by the Investigating Officer as this task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer for the said purpose.
6. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to submit a representation along-with relevant documents in support thereof before the Investigating Officer, who shall consider the same strictly in accordance with law.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /17