M/S SIRI SMELTERS AND ENERGY PVT. LTD. v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLMA/608/2025 · 2025-11-21
Anoop Kumar Dhand
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 46843 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 46843 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 608/2025 In S.B. Criminal Misc. 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. Mrs. 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 Son 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 JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order 21/11/2025
1. The instant misc. application has been preferred seeking modification of the order dated 07.11.2025 passed by this Court while deciding S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 6705/2025.
2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that while deciding the aforesaid petition, a liberty was granted to the petitioners to
(2 of 2) [CRLMA-608/2025] submit a representation along with documents before the Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer was directed to consider the same in accordance with law and it was observed that in case, the Investigating Officer comes to the conclusion that a cognizable offence is made out then he would issue a notice under Section 35 BNSS to the petitioners. Counsel submits that a direction was required to be issued to the Investigating Officer to issue at least fifteen days prior notice to the petitioners, in case, the Investigating Officer comes to the conclusion that arrest/custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required. Counsel submits that for the aforesaid limited purpose, the instant misc. application has been submitted.
3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.
4. Considering the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioners, a direction is issued to the Investigating Officer that in case, he comes to the conclusion that arrest of the petitioners is required for the purpose of investigation, he would issue fifteen days prior notice to the petitioners before proceeding against them.
5. With the aforesaid observations, the misc. application stands
disposed of.
6. This order would be treated as part and parcel of the order dated 07.11.2025 passed by this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 6705/2025.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/208