Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 48114 (RAJ)

MAHENDRA SINGH SON OF SHRI CHOTU SINGH v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/944/2025 · 2025-11-01

Anoop Kumar Dhand

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:43960] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.944/2025 Mahendra Singh Son Of Shri Chotu Singh, Aged About 47 Years, Resident Of Saint Joseph School Ke Piche, Aadarsh Nagar, Parbatpura, Ajmer, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Kumar Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 01/11/2025 1. A limited prayer has been made for issuing directions to the respondent to comply with the directions issued in the order dated 10.10.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.3, Ajmer in FIR No.441/2018 registered with Police Station Civil Line, District Ajmer. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid FIR, lodged by the petitioner, resulted in final report negative against which a Protest Petition was filed by the petitioner, wherein the Ld. Magistrate vide order dated 10.10.2022 formulated two points for further investigation and sent the same to the concerned Police Station. Learned counsel submits that inspite of passing of more than three years, till date the result of the further investigation, as directed by the Ld. Magistrate, has not been submitted before the trial court, hence, interference of this Court is warranted. [2025:RJ-JP:43960] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-944/2025] 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the matter is still under investigation and the result of the investigation would be submitted before the competent court of law in due course of time, therefore, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the order dated 10.10.2022 passed by the Ld. Magistrate. 5. Perusal of the aforesaid order indicates that two points for further investigation were formulated by the Ld. Magistrate, and directions were issued to the concerned Investigating Officer conduct further his investigation and submit the result of the investigation before the court below. 6. It appears that more than three years have passed, however till date, the aforesaid order has not been complied with by the concerned Investigating Authority. 7. Considering the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant criminal misc. petition with the expectation from the investigating authority that, he would make all possible endeavors to complete the investigation pursuant to the directions issued by the Ld. Magistrate vide order dated 10.10.2022, and submit the report of investigation before the court below, expeditiously as early as possible. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the criminal misc. petition and all applications (pending, if any) stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/68