[2025:RJ-JP:44951] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 478/2017 Ramswaroop S/o Shri Puranchand, R/o Adarsh Nagar, Kota Road, Baran, Police Station Kotwali, Baran, District Baran, Prop. Jat Traders Baran. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Rajasthan State Road Development And Construction Corporation Ltd Setu Bhawan, Opposite Jhalana Doongri, Jaipur-Agra Bypass, Jaipur, Rajasthan through its Project Director. 2. The Investigating Officer In FIR No.16/2007 Registered At Police Station Ramganj Mandi, District Kota, for the offences under Section 409 IPC. 3. Manoj Kumar S/o Shri Omprakash, R/o RSRDC, Unit Jhalawar, Jhalawar, Kotwali, Jhalawar, Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Harshita Sharma, Adv. for Dr. Mahesh Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : None HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 10/11/2025 1. This Criminal Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers:- “It is, therefore, humbly and most respectively prayed that this Criminal Writ Petition may kindly be accepted and allowed and further :- (1) by an appropriate order of direction in nature thereof respondent no.1 may kindly be directed to do the needful for sending dispute arose with the petitioner and appoint a sole arbitrator for amicably settlement of dispute arose between the petitioner and respondent no.1; [2025:RJ-JP:44951] (2 of 2) [CRLW-478/2017] (2) by an appropriate order of direction in nature thereof FIR No.16/2017 (annex.1) lodged by the respondent no.3 against the petitioner may kindly be quashed and set aside; (3) by an appropriate order of direction in nature thereof respondents including police may kindly be restrained not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner; (4) Any other writ order or direction which may be deemed proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be issued in favour of petitioner.” 2. A bare perusal of cause title of the writ petition, would reveal that although, prayer No.2 is with regard to quashing of FIR, yet State Government was not impleaded as a party to the writ petition. 3. In addition to above, prayer No.1 made by the petitioner reveals that petitioner has prayed for appointment of arbitrator for adjudicating the dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.1. It is settled that appointment of arbitrator can be done only in accordance with contract and that to in the light of provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Criminal Writ Petition for making such prayer is not maintainable. 4. In view of above, the Criminal Writ Petition is dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J Jatin /33