HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7067/2025 1. Abhishek Chaudhary Son Of Shree Vijay Singh, Resident Of Village Basokar, Tehsil Kumher, District Deeg, Rajasthan 2. Vijay Singh Son Of Madan Singh, Resident Of Village Basokar, Tehsil Kumher, District Deeg, Rajasthan 3. Rajat Chaudhary, Son Of Vijay Singh, Resident Of Village Basokar, Tehsil Kumher, District Deeg, Rajasthan 4. Jyoti Chaudhary, Daughter Of Vijay Singh, Resident Of Village Basokar, Tehsil Kumher, District Deeg, Rajasthan 5. Vyanjana Chaudhary Wife Of Abhishek Chaudhary, Resident Of Village Basokar, Tehsil Kumher, District Deeg, Rajasthan 6. Smt. Omwati Chaudhary Wife Of Rajat Chaudhary, Resident Of Village Basokar, Tehsil Kumher, District Deeg, Rajasthan ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Akshay Garg, Son Of Shree Chaman Prakash Garg, Aged About 34 Years, Resident Of 51, Vikas Nagar, Heerapura, Ajmer Road, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.P. Goyal with Mr. Rohan Agarwal and Ronak Bansal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Choudhary, PP Mr. Yash Takhar JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 19/11/2025 1. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made to quash the impugned FIR (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7067/2025] No.466/2025 registered with the Police Station Karnivihar, District Jaipur (West) under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 316(5) and 61(2) of the BNS. 2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the subject property belongs to one Thomas Jacob, who resides abroad and he has executed a power of attorney in favour of the petitioners. On the basis of the same, the subject property was sold to the complainant in the year 2019 by an oral agreement. Counsel submits that part sale consideration was paid by the complainant to the petitioners and balance amount was not paid by them and instead of filing a suit for specific performance, the instant FIR has been lodged by the complainant against the petitioner after a delay of more than six years. Counsel submits that the instant case is purely a civil dispute between the parties to which a colour of criminal case has been given, hence interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioners and submitted that the subject land does not belong to the said Thomas Jacob, rather the same belongs to Abhishek Choudhary son of the petitioner No.2 and he was not having any power of attorney of the said person to sell the subject property to the complainant, but in-spite of above a sale consideration amount was received by him in his bank account. He further submits that neither the money has been refunded nor the registered sale deed has been executed in (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7067/2025] favour of the complainant. They co-jointly submit that the allegations levelled in the FIR reveal commission of a cognizable offence, hence interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. This Court is not going to adjudge the correctness of the allegations levelled against the petitioners by exercising its inherent jurisdiction contained under Section 528 of the BNSS. Certainly, this job is assigned to the Investigating Officer, who will investigate the matter on the basis of the material and evidence available before him. 6. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to submit an appropriate representation before the Investigating Officer, who shall consider the same strictly in accordance with law. 7. In case, the Investigating Officer comes to the conclusion that a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners, he would issue a notice under Section 35 of the BNSS to the petitioners and proceed further in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observations/directions, 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/37