[2025:RJ-JP:49087] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2095/2025 1. Smt. Kanta W/o Sh. Hira Lal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Chandanpura, Police Station, Roopwas, Distt. Bharatpur ( Rajasthan). 2. Omprakash Alias Omi S/o Kishan Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Chandanpura, Police Station, Roopwas, Distt. Bharatpur ( Rajasthan). ----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms.Pooja Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr.Amit Punia, PP Mr.Tapesh Agarwal, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 03/12/2025 1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for quashing of the impugned F.I.R. No.94/2021 registered at Police Station Roopwas, District Bharatpur for the offence under Section 363 IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after investigation, the charge-sheet has been submitted against some of the co-accused persons, but the investigation has been kept pending against the petitioners under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. Counsel submits that during the course of trial against the co- accused persons, the statements of the material witnesses, namely, Gyan Singh, Lacchu @ Madhuri, Hero, Bavita, Anita & Bhagat Singh have been recorded and they have not supported [2025:RJ-JP:49087] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-2095/2025] the case of prosecution, hence, they have been declared as hostile. Counsel submits that even in the impugned F.I.R., no specific overt act has been assigned to the petitioners, therefore, considering the prevailing circumstances of the case, the impugned F.I.R. pending against the petitioners at Police Station Roopwas, District Bharatpur may be quashed. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and submitted that the allegations levelled in the impugned F.I.R. reveal commission of a cognizable offence and the charge-sheet has already been submitted against the co-accused persons, but the investigation has been kept pending against the petitioners under Section 173 Cr.P.C. Counsel submits that the petitioners cannot take benefits of the statements of the witnesses, which have been recorded during the course of trial against the co- accused persons, hence, under these circumstances, the petitioners do not deserve any indulgence of this Court and the instant criminal misc. Petition is liable to be rejected. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Perusal of the impugned F.I.R. indicates that the contents of the same reveal commission of a cognizable offence and the investigation is still kept pending against the petitioners under Section 173 Cr.P.C., the petitioners cannot take the benefit of the statements of the witnesses, which have been recorded during the course of trial against the co-accused persons. 6. However, they would be at liberty to submit an appropriate representation before the Investigating Officer, who shall consider the same strictly in accordance with law. [2025:RJ-JP:49087] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-2095/2025] 7. With the aforesaid observation, 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 /12