HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8601/2024 Imran Husain S/o Iqbal Husain, Aged About 35 Years, R/o 209, Ganj, Babu Gar, Behind Ramdev Temple, Ganj, Ajmer. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Smt. Shobha Devi W/o Late Shri Vishnu Kumar, Aged About 54 Years, R/o M.N. 11/08/36, Kodhapeta, Jagannathawari Vidhi, Vijayawada Urban (Mandal) Dist. Krishna, Andra Pradesh. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kartikey Johary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 31/10/2025 1. The instant petition has been preferred for quashing of FIR No.398/2023 registered with Police Station Civil Line, Ajmer. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the complainant herself issued the Power of Attornery in favour of the petitioner and now she has changed her version and is alleging that by making forged signatures, the aforesaid documents have been prepared. Counsel submits that the Police is not investigating the matter in a fair and impartial manner, and without getting analysis of the signatures of the complainant on the other documents, the Police is bent upon to apprehend the petitioner. Counsel submits that before approaching this Court, a detailed (2 of 2) [CRLMP-8601/2024] comprehensive representation was submitted to the Investigating Officer, but no heed has been paid, hence, interference of this Court is warranted. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer and submitted that the allegations made in FIR reveal commission of a cognizable offence, which is required to be investigated by the Investigating Agency, hence, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. This Court is of the view that the allegations made in the FIR are the subject matter of investigation and the correctness of the same cannot be seen in exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court contained under Section 528 of the BNSS. 6. The petitioner is at liberty to file one more representation before the Investigating Officer, who shall consider the same in accordance with law. 7. Even if the Investigating Officer comes to the conclusion that any cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, he shall issue notice under Section 35 of the BNSS to the petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/6