[2026:RJ-JP:14195] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 993/2018 Prabhu Narayan Sharma S/o Late Shri Chauthmal Sharma, R/o Plot No. 422, Pratap Nagar Vistar, Baith Ji Ka Chauraha, Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp. 2. Smt. Pushpa Pandey W/o Rajendra Pandey, R/o Village Pokhariya Wala PS Harmara, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore-PP Ms. Vedeshi Kumari Rajawat and Ms. Lata Kumari for Mr. Amit Jindal JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 06/04/2026 1. By way of filing the present petition, a prayer has been made to quash the impugned FIR No. 663/2015, registered with the Police Station Murlipura, District Jaipur (South) for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 IPC. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter pertains to a dispute between the brother and sister, in-fact no offence has been committed by the petitioner and with false and fabricated allegations, the instant impugned FIR has been registered. Counsel submits that the nature of offence is purely civil to which colour of criminal case has been given to make pressure upon the petitioner in order to obtain money. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted. [2026:RJ-JP:14195] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-993/2018] 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as counsel for the complainant oppose the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and submits that after thorough investigation in the instant matter, charge-sheet has already been submitted and thereafter, cognizance has already been taken against the petitioner for the above stated offences and now the case is posted for arguments on framing of charge and discharge, hence interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Contents of the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR reveal commission of a cognizable offence. The correctness of the same cannot be adjudged by this Court while exercising inherent jurisdiction contained under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the purpose of quashing the impugned FIR. Since charge-sheet has been submitted and cognizance has already been taken against the petitioner and now, the case is posted for arguments on charge and discharge, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant petition, while granting liberty to the petitioner to take all available arguments and defence which have been taken before this Court, at the time of arguments on charge and discharge. 6. Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/30