[2025:RJ-JP:48194] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1046/2025 Sukhdev Sharma S/o Shri Mathura Prasad Sharma, R/o 364 A- Krishi Nagar Toll Tax, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Sanjev Kumar S/o Siyaram Jayant, R/o 946, Ramnagar Colony Sastrinagar, Jaipur ( North), Rajasthan. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1907/2023 Smt. Sapna Meena W/o Sh. Surma Meena, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Plot No. 259, Brijbihar Yojana, Near R.s Jagatpura, District - Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. The Dy. Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur City (East) Jaipur Rajasthan. 3. The Station House Office, Police Station Pratap Nagar (Jaipur City East), District Jaipur City (East), Jaipur (Raj.) 4. 5. Shri Sanjev Kuma S/o Shri Siyaram Jayant, R/o 946, Ramnagar Colony Sastri Nagar, Jaipur City (North) Jaipur (Rajasthan). Smt. Kalawati Devi W/o Buddharam, aged 62 years r/o 189, Hariyasar Ghasotan Churu, Rajasthan. At present r/o 426, Jaudon Nagar, Maharani Farm, Durgapura, Jaipur. ----Respondents [2025:RJ-JP:48194] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-1046/2025] For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Vandana Dabi for Mr. Manish Kumar Mr. S.N. Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP Ms. Chandrakala Sahu for Mr. Rinesh Gupta JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/11/2025 1. Matter comes up on an interim application No.01/2024 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1907/2023 for impleading the applicant-Kalawati Devi as party in the array of cause title. 2. Application stands allowed for the reasons stated therein. Applicant-Kalawati Devi is impleaded as party respondent in the array of cause title. 3. Amended cause title is ordered to be taken on the record. 4. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1907/2023 pleads no instruction. 5. Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant- respondent submits that an interim order is operating in the instant matter since 27.04.2023. Since then, the matter has never been argued and the interim order has been extended from one date to another, due to which the Police is not investigating the matter further and is not submitting the conclusion report before the Competent Court of law. [2025:RJ-JP:48194] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-1046/2025] 6. Instead of hearing the matters on stay vacation application, this Court deems it just and proper to hear the arguments on merits. 7. As per the contents of the petitions, the petitioners have not committed any offence whatsoever and they have been falsely booked in the instant case, hence a request has been made to quash the proceedings in favour of the petitioners arising out of the impugned FIR. 8. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant submits that the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR reveal commission of cognizable offence and after investigation, charge-sheet has already been submitted against the petitioner Sukhdev Sharma and the investigation has been kept pending against the petitioner Sapna Meena on account of the interim order dated 27.04.2023 passed by this Court, by which directions have been issued for not taking coercive action against her. Counsel submits that even otherwise also, the investigation is complete and the involvement of Sapna Meena has also been found under Section 448 IPC. 9. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 10. This Court while exercising its inherent jurisdiction contained under Section 528 of the BNSS cannot adjudge and adjudicate the correctness and genuineness of the allegations levelled against the petitioners. Certainly, this task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer, who has already [2025:RJ-JP:48194] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-1046/2025] investigated the matter thoroughly from all four corners and has found involvement of the petitioners. 11. With the aforesaid observations/directions, both the instant criminal misc. petitions stands disposed of. The stay applications and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 12. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to take all available defence, which have been taken in these petitions at the appropriate stage of the trial. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/16-17