[2026:RJ-JP:15638] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 327/2015 Hanuman Prasad Goyal S/o Shri Ramji Lal Goyal, aged about 69 years, R/o 132, Rajendra Nagar, Bharatpur (Rajasthan) ----Complainant/Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Rajasthan through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government Secreatariat, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 2. The Director General of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau, Jhalana Doongri Area, Jaipur (Rajasthan) 3. The Additional Superintendent of Police, A.C.B. S.U. Kota (Rajasthan) ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mahesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore-PP with Mr. Shubham Sain JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 15/04/2026 1 By way of filing the instant petition, a challenge has been made to the impugned order dated 28.08.2015, passed by the Special Judge, Sessions Court, Prevention of Corruption Act, Kota in Case No. 11/2003, by which the compliant submitted by the petitioner has been closed. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that a complaint under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120 B IPC was submitted by the petitioner against the accused persons wherein allegations of demand of bribe etc. were levelled against them. Counsel submits that the [2026:RJ-JP:15638] (2 of 3) [CRLW-327/2015] learned Special Judge instead of sending the matter for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., has sent the matter to the Anti Corruption Bureau, Kota for conducting preliminary inquiry, wherein after conducting the said inquiry, Final Report (Negative) was submitted. Counsel submits that the impugned order has been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or without affording any opportunity of filing any protest petition against the aforesaid report submitted by the Anti Corruption Bureau, Kota. Hence, under such circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the instant criminal writ petition. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Perusal of the record indicates that a complaint under Sections 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act read with Section 120B IPC was submitted by the petitioner against the accused persons wherein several allegations relating to receiving bribe were levelled against them and the same was submitted before the Court of Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption Act Cases. The learned Special Judge sent the matter for inquiry to the Anti Corruption Bureau, Kota who conducted preliminary inquiry and submitted Final Report (Negative) before the Court below and the same was accepted by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 28.08.2015. 6. It appears that the counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner before the Court below has raised no objection against [2026:RJ-JP:15638] (3 of 3) [CRLW-327/2015] accepting the Final Report (Negative) and the no-objection report was accepted by the Court below and accordingly, the complaint was rejected. This Court finds substance in the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner never authorized his counsel to give no objection against the Final Report (Negative) submitted by the Anti Corruption Bureau, Kota, hence under these circumstances, the petitioner has been deprived to submit his objection/protest. The order could have been passed after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, hence under these circumstances, the principles of natural justice have not been followed. 7. On this count alone, the order impugned is not sustainable in the eyes of law and the same is liable to be and is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned Special Judge, Sessions Court, Prevention of Corruption Act, Kota to provide appropriate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and in case, any protest is submitted by the petitioner against the Final Report submitted by the Anti Corruption Bureau Kota, appropriate orders would be passed after hearing. 8. It is expected from the learned Special Judge, Sessions Court, Prevention of Corruption Act, Kota to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present criminal writ petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/38