[2026:RJ-JP:17760] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2606/2026 1. Vineet Kumar Son Of Shri Ummed Singh, Resident Of Plot No.304, Kisan Colony, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 333001. At Present Resident Of D-117, Gautam Marg, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur. 2. Ummed Singh Son Of Shri Dhudaram, Resident Of Plot No.304, Kisan Colony, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 333001. At Present Resident Of D-117, Gautam Marg, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur. 3. Kamla Devi Wife Of Shri Ummed Singh, Resident Of Plot No.304, Kisan Colony, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 333001. At Present Resident Of D-117, Gautam Marg, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur. 4. Pramila Wife Of Shri Piyush Choudhary, Resident Of Plot No.304, Kisan Colony, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 333001. At Present Resident Of D-117, Gautam Marg, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur. 5. Sharmila Wife Of Shri Jitendra Ahlawat, Resident Of Plot No.304, Kisan Colony, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 333001. At Present Resident Of D-117, Gautam Marg, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor 2. Manu Faujdar Wife Of Vineet Kumar, Daughter Of Udai Singh Faujdar, Resident Of P-43, Raj Laxmi Enclave-3, Jagatpura, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bhardwaj, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Manju Dave, PP [2026:RJ-JP:17760] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-2606/2026] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Order 27/04/2026 1- ;kph&vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls ;g ;kfpdk varxZr /kkjk 528 Hkkjrh; ukxfjd lqj{kk lafgrk ds rgr ifjoknh&izR;FkhZ dh vksj ls iqfyl Fkkuk&efgyk Fkkuk] t;iqj 'kgj ¼iwoZ½ esa iathc) djok;h x;h izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k 53@2026 vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 85] 316¼2½] 115¼2½] 126¼2½ ch-,u-,l- dks fujLr fd;s tkus gsrq izLrqr dh x;h gSA 2- fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kph&vfHk;qDrx.k dk fuosnu gS fd ;kph@vfHk;qDr Øe&1 }kjk fookg foPNsn dh ;kfpdk lacaf/kr ikfjokfjd U;k;ky; esa izLrqr fd;s tkus ds mijkar dkmaVj CykLV ds :i esa feF;k vk/kkjksa ij ;g izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ntZ djokbZ xbZ gS] tks foyEc ls o dkuwuh o U;kf;d izfØ;k dk nq:i;ksx gS] yxk;s x;s vijk/k fujk/kkj gSa vkSj var esa mijksDr vk/kkjksa ij ;g izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ fujLr fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA 3- fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd }kjk ;kfpdk dk fojks/k djrs gq, tkfgj fd;k fd izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa of.kZr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij laKs; vijk/k ds rRo izdV gks jgs gSa] mijksDr vkjksiksa vFkok bl ;kfpdk ds ek/;e ls vfHk;qDr }kjk fy, x;s cpko ds laca/k esa vHkh vafre fu"d"kZ ugha fn;k tk ldrk] ;g vuqla/kku@fopkj.k dk fo"k; gS] vUr esa ;kfpdk [kkfjt fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA 4- nksuksa i{kksa ds rdksaZ ds lanHkZ esa vfHkys[k dk voyksdu fd;kA 5- orZeku izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ ds ek/;e ls ifjokfn;k euw QkStnkj }kjk ;g vkjksi yxk;k x;k gS fd mldk fookg ;kph@vfHk;qDr Øe&1 fouhr dqekj ds lkFk fnukad 23-11-2023 dks gqvk Fkk] lg&vfHk;qDrx.k mlds ifr ds ukrsnkj gSa] fookg gksus ds mijkar vf/kd ngst dh ekax dks ysdj [2026:RJ-JP:17760] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-2606/2026] ifjokfn;k ds lkFk xkyh&xykSp] ekjihV vkfn djuk 'kq: dj fn;k rFkk Øwjrk dk ;g O;ogkj lrr :i ls o fujarj jgkA 6- ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk State of Uttar Pradesh and Anrs. Vs. Akhil Sharda and Ors with Sanjeet Jaiswal Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. 2022 SCC OnLine SC 820 ds iSjk la[;k&07 esa ;g O;oLFkk izfrikfnr dh x;h gS%& "7. Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court by which the High Court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. As observed and held by this Court in a catena of decisions no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considered." 7- blh izdkj ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk Kamaladevi Agarwal Vs. State of W.B. & Ors. (2002) 1 SCC 555 ds iSjk la[;k&07 esa ;g O;oLFkk izfrikfnr dh x;h gS%& "7. This Court has consistently held that the revisional or inherent powers of quashing the proceedings at the initial stage should be exercised sparingly and only where the allegations made in the complaint or the FIR, even if taken it at the face value and accepted in entirety, do not prima facie discolse the commission of an offence. Disputed and controversial facts cannot be made the basis for the exercise of the jurisdiction." [2026:RJ-JP:17760] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-2606/2026] 8- mijksDr U;kf;d n`"Vkarksa esa izfrikfnr O;oLFkk ds vuqlkj Li"V gS fd vuqla/kku dh LVst ij izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ dks fujLr djkus gsrq vUrfuZfgr 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs le; izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa of.kZr vkjksi rFkk vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls fy, x;s cpko o vU; lkexzh dh lR;rk] fo'oluh;rk vkfn ds laca/k esa laf{kIr tkap vFkok laf{kIr fopkj.k vuqKs; ugha gSA orZeku ekeys esa izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa of.kZr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij laKs; vijk/k ds rRo izdV gks jgs gSaA ;g izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ U;k;ky;hu izfdz;k dk nq:i;ksx djus gsrq ntZ djk;h x;h gks] ,slk Li"V ekeyk ugha gS rFkk yxk;s x;s vkjksi vius vki esa vlaHkkO; gks] ,slh fLFkfr Hkh ugha gSA vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls tks cpko fy;s x;s gSa] os vuqla/kku dk fo"k; gks ldrs gSa rFkk vkjksi i= izLrqr gksus dh fLFkfr eas cpko lk{; ds le; lqlaxr gks ldrs gSaA vfHk;qDr }kjk fy, x;s cpko ek= vk/kkj ij izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ dks fujLr fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha gSA izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ dks fujLr djus gsrq vUrfuZfgr 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx la;r rjhds ls o iw.kZ lko/kkuh ds lkFk visf{kr gSA lkekU; :i ls tc rd lqn`< vk/kkj ugha gksa] vuqla/kku vFkok fopkj.k dh izfØ;k dks jksdk tkuk vFkok ckf/kr fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha gSA 9- mijksDr foospkukuqlkj izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ fujLr djus gsrq /kkjk 528 Hkkjrh; ukxfjd lqj{kk lafgrk ds rgr {ks=kf/kdkfjrk dk iz;ksx gLrxr ekeys esa fd;k tkuk mfpr ugha gSA 10- ifj.kker% ;g ;kfpdk [kkfjt dh tkrh gS rFkk LFkxu vkosnu Hkh mDrkuqlkj [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA (UMA SHANKER VYAS),J DINESH KUMAWAT /74