[2026:RJ-JP:13545] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4058/2015 Pukhraj Prajapati S/o Shri Bhairu Lal Prajapati, Aged about 29 years, R/o House No. 333 Jadaun Nagar, Near Durgapura Railway Station, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, through Public Prosecutor. 2. Narendra Dayama, S/o Sh. Sanwar Mal Dayama, at present Station House Officer, Karni Vihar, Jaipur through the Commissioner of Police, Police Commissionerate, Jaipur (at the relevant time was SHO, Shipra Path, Jaipur). 3. Abhay Kumar Singh, S/o Late Sh. Ghanshyam Singh, at present Constable, Police Station Mansarowar, through the Commissioner of Police, Police Commissionerate, Jaipur (at the relevant time was Constable, Shipra Path, Jaipur). 4. Hansraj, S/o Sh. Ramphool, Aged about 37 years, Presently attached with Police Lines, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, through the Commissioner of Police, Police Commissionerate, Jaipur (at the relevant time was Constable, Shipra Path, Jaipur). ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sharad Purohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP. Mr. Rinesh Gupta, with Mr. Saurabh Pratap Singh for Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 01/04/2026 1. Instant petition has been submitted before this Court with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore, prayed that this Misc. Petition may kindly be allowed and order dated 01.08.2015 passed by the Addl. Session Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur may kindly be partially allowed and further the order dated [2026:RJ-JP:13545] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-4058/2015] 11.11.2014 passed by the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur may kindly be modified and further be directed to take the cognizance under Section 327, 383, 386 IPC.” 2. By way of filing the instant petition a prayer has been made for modification of the order dated 11.11.2014 passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.11, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur and it has been further prayed that directions be issued to the concerned Court to take cognizance against the accused-respondents for the offences under Section 327, 383 & 386 IPC. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused- respondents apprised this Court that much water has flown since passing of the impugned order. Thereafter, charge-sheet has been framed against the accused persons and the trial is proceeding before the court below. Hence, under these circumstances, this petition has become infructuous. 4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the complainant- petitioner is not helpless, he can file an appropriate application under Section 216 Cr.P.C. for alteration of charge, in case sufficient evidence is available on the record for framing of charges against the accused-respondents under Section 327, 383 & 386 IPC. 5. In case such application is submitted by the petitioner before the Court below, it is expected from the Court below to decide the same strictly in accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to both the sides without being influenced by any of the previous orders passed by the learned Magistrate and Revisional Court. [2026:RJ-JP:13545] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-4058/2015] 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Shivam-Puneet/18