HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.1467/2018 Aashish Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Jairam Sharma, R/o Village Indali, Police Station Bagar, Distt. Jhunjhunu. At Present In Distt. Jail Jhunjhunu. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through P.p. 2. Nanu Singh S/o Shri Raghuveer Singh, R/o Hansasar, Police Station Sadar Jhunjhunu, Jhunjhunu Raj. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 22/01/2025 1. By way of filing this criminal misc. petition, an FIR No.118/2018 registered at Police Station Kotwali, Jhunjhunu District Jhunjhunu for the offences under Sections 147, 186, 336 and 353 IPC for quashing of FIR. 2. Perusal of the record of the other misc. petitions tagged with this misc. petition indicates that the other co-accused Pappu Lal Jat & others approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1553/2018, and other co-accused Sanjay Jhajharia and Others approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1554/2018, and in both these petitions also, the instant FIR was assailed and after considering the averments and arguments made by the rival side, both these (2 of 4) [CRLMP-1467/2018] petitions were disposed of vide order dated 02.04.2018 with the following observations and directions:- “By this common order, SBCRLMP No. 1553/2018 preferred by Pappu Lal Jat and others and SBCRLMP No.1554/2018 instituted by Sanjay Jhajharia and others shall be decided together, as counsel for the parties are in agreement that on facts and law, both the cases are identical. Briefly stated, that on 8.3.2018, between 11:00 AM to3:00 PM, national programme of Beti Padhao Beti Bachao was being held in District Jhunjhunu. Prime Minister had come to address the gathering. It is alleged that the petitioners herein lodged the protest by raising slogans. The learned counsel for the petitioners contend that to aggravate the incident, it has been falsely stated that the persons present had given fist blows and pushes to the police officials. The learned counsel for the petitioners have contended that to peacefully agitate, is right of the petitioners, who are none else but contractual employees under the National Rural Health Mission, since 2008. It is contended that petitioners wanted to ventilate their grievances before Prime Minister by urging that they should be made permanent employees. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that Superintendent of Police, Jhunjhunu, took it as a personal affront and has added the offences which are in noway made out. The learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that if video coverage and video footage are taken into possession, it will be apparent that the petitioners have not committed any offence. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the disputed question of facts cannot be determined in a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that as to which version i.e. one unfolded in the FIR and another as projected by the petitioners is true, it shall be determined during the course of trial. The learned counsel for the petitioners have stated with responsibility, that there is no medical evidence on record that any police official suffered any injury. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. (3 of 4) [CRLMP-1467/2018] Without entertaining the prayer of quashing of FIR, the present petition is disposed of by issuing following directions:- a) That the investigation of the present case shall be assigned to officer not below the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police, posted in any other district than Jhunjhunu, by the Inspector General of Police of concerned range. b) That the said investigating officer shall obtain video coverage and video footage available with the government agencies or with the media to determine the role of the petitioners. c) That Additional Superintendent of Police to whom investigation shall be assigned, shall also record the statement of the independent witnesses who were present at the venue. d) That the Additional Superintendent of Police to whom investigation shall be assigned, after taking entire evidence into consideration, shall submit his report of investigation alongwith his opinion in the court of concerned area Judicial Magistrate within a period of two months, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.” 3. Considering, thereafter, one more Criminal Misc. Petition bearing No.2347/2018 was submitted before this Court, and the same was also disposed of in light of the same order and terms decided in the case of Pappu Lal Jat & others (supra). 4. Perusal of the order dated 02.04.2018 indicates that Additional Superintendent of Police was assigned investigation and he was directed to submit the report of investigation before the jurisdictional Magistrate within a period of two months. 5. It appears that in pursuance of the aforesaid directions issued by this Court on 02.04.2018, the result of investigation might have been submitted before the jurisdictional Magistrate, hence under these circumstances, this criminal misc. petition has become infructuous. (4 of 4) [CRLMP-1467/2018] 6. Accordingly, the criminal misc. petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. 7. Stay application as well as all applications (pending, if any) also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Karan/62