[2025:RJ-JP:44719] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.3887/2025 1. Swarupa Ram Son Of Shri Umedaram, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Rewali, Nagana, Barmer (Raj.) 2. Brijmohan Son Of Shri Roop Chand, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of 586, Basant Bihar, Dadabari, Kota (Raj.) 3. Hansmukh Bhai Son Of Shri Phanti Ravat, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of 803, Rawal Vas Gatrad, Kanbah, Ahamdabad Rural, Gujrat. 4. Bhanwar Singh Son Jaipal Siongh, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Jain Mandir Ke Pichhe, M-N 318 Ch Gumanpura, Kota (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p. 2. Suresh Kumar, Aged About 31 Years, Presently Posted As Sub Inspector, At Police Station Kaithun, Kota Rural (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshul Sharma Ms. Nidhi Suwalka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 07/11/2025 1. By way of filing this criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been made for quashing the proceedings arising out of the Criminal Case No.24846/2025 pending before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate No.1, North Kota arising out of FIR No.416/2024 registered with Police Station Kaithun District Kota Rural for the offences under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023 and Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950. [2025:RJ-JP:44719] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-3887/2025] 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an FIR No.416/2024 was registered against the petitioners for various offences under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023 and Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 that vehicle of the petitioner was carrying illicit liquor. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are having a licensed shop of liquor and the petitioners were carrying valid liquor on the basis of valid permit for which the government duty was paid, inspite of above, the impugned FIR was registered and charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioners for the above stated offences. Learned counsel submits that when license of the petitioners was cancelled by the Excise Officer for contravention of the provisions of the law, they preferred an appeal before the Excise Commissioner and the same was allowed vide judgment dated 21.02.2025 and it was found that the liquor in question was purchased by the petitioners after paying government duty and the petitioners were having valid license to possess the same and, accordingly, the license of the petitioners was restored and the liquor was returned to the petitioners. Learned counsel submits that, under these circumstances, no offence is made out against the petitioners, so entire proceedings arising out of the aforesaid criminal case be quashed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioners and looking to the fact that after investigation, [2025:RJ-JP:44719] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-3887/2025] the petitioners have been charge-sheeted for the offence under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023 and Section 19/54 of the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950, still the arguments on charges have not been heard. The petitioner is not remediless, he can bring all these facts into the notice of the trial court at the time of arguments on charge. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. 7. It is expected from the trial court to consider all these documents and arguments, so advanced by the petitioners before it and pass a reasoned and speaking order expeditiously, as early as possible, strictly in accordance with law. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/11