[2025:RJ-JP:44744] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.6705/2025 1. M/s Siri Smelters And Energy Pvt. Ltd., Havings Its Registered Address, Plot No 262/b And 263/a, Apiic Growth Center, Bobbili, Andhra Pradesh-535558 Through Its Managing Director Sh. Sajja Naga Mohan. 2. Sajja Naga Mohan S/o Shri Prasad Sajja, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of 2-38/2/a, Srirama Colony, Madhapur, K.v., Rangareddy, Telengana - 500081 3. Sajja Jyothsna Sree W/o Shri Sajja Naga Mohan, Aged About 52 Years, Resident Of 2-38/2/a, Srirama Colony, Madhapur, K.v., Rangareddy, Telengana - 500081 ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Sunil Jajoo Of Not Known, Aged About 50 Years, Director M/s. Jajoo Rashmi Refractories Ltd., Having Its Office At F 409, Road No. 14, Vkia Vishwakarma, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhrigu Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Mr. Ravindra Singh Shekhawat JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/11/2025 1. By way of filing this criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned FIR No.207/2025 registered with Police Station Vishwakarma, District Jaipur (West) for the offences under Sections 420 & 406 IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in fact the dispute between the parties is of commercial nature for which the complainant has already submitted a claim under MSME on [2025:RJ-JP:44744] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6705/2025] 01.03.2024 and file complaint under Section 7 of the IPC before National Company Law Tribunal on 04.04.2025. Learned counsel submits that the bare reading of the FIR does not amount to any offence, inspite of above, the Police is bent upon to apprehend the petitioners and submitted the charge-sheet. Learned counsel submits that, in such like matters, the FIR cannot be registered as this view has been taken by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat at Jodhpur in the case of Rana Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. while deciding S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.4893/2024 on 06.08.2024, hence, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel appearing for the complainant oppose the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioners and submit that allegations made in the FIR reveals that commission of cognizable offence, which is required to be investigated by the Investigating Officer, hence, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that allegations made in the FIR are subject matter of investigation and the same cannot be quashed by this Court under its inherent jurisdiction contained under Section 528 BNSS, 2023. However, the petitioners are at liberty to file a representation before the Investigating Officer, who shall consider the same in accordance with law. 5. In case, the Investigating Officer comes to the conclusion that a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners, then he shall ensure the compliance of the mandatory provisions contained under Section 35 of the BNSS. [2025:RJ-JP:44744] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6705/2025] 6. With the aforesaid observations, the misc. petition stands disposed of. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/25