Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 49989 (RAJ)

VAKAR SON OF SAHABUDEEN v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMP/6945/2025 · 2025-11-03

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:44595] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.6945/2025 Vakar Son Of Sahabudeen, Resident Of Sablana, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Public Prosecutor. 2. Hakamdeen Son Of Raseed, Resident Of Sablana, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 06/11/2025 1. By way of filing this criminal misc. petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned FIR No.269/2025 registered with Police Station Kaman, District Deeg for the offences under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 331(2), 303(2) and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a government servant and he has been falsely booked in the instant case in order to spoil his service career. Learned counsel submits that on earlier occasion also, an FIR No.271/2025 was registered against the petitioner at Police Station Kaman District Deeg, which resulted in final report negative. Learned counsel submits that, under these circumstances, the instant FIR be quashed qua the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:44595] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6945/2025] 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that allegations made in the FIR reveals that commission of cognizable offence, which is required to be investigated by the Investigating Officer, hence, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that allegations made in the FIR are subject matter of investigation and the same cannot be quashed by this Court under its inherent jurisdiction contained under Section 528 BNSS, 2023. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a representation before the Investigating Officer, who shall consider the same in accordance with law. 5. This Court finds no merit and substance in this petition and the same is hereby rejected. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/68