Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6974 (RAJ)

DIVYA SHARMA, C/O JAGDISH PRASAD SHARMA v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/7799/2026 · 2026-05-18

Maneesh Sharma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:20856] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7799/2026 Divya Sharma, C/o Jagdish Prasad Sharma, Aged About 29 Years, 34, Shekhawat Colony Meenawala Sirsi Road, Panchayawala, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302034 ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through the Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Government of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur - 302005 2. Bank of Baroda through its Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Vaishali Branch, Jagdamba Tower, Amrapali Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302021 3. Dig Cyber Crime, Police Headquarters, Jaipur, Rajasthan - 302005 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Adarsh Singhal For Respondent(s) : Ms. Somitra Chaturvedi, Dy. GC (for respondent Nos.1 & 3) Mr. Laxmikant Sharma for Mr. Ram Naresh Vijay (for respondent No.2) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 18/05/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, seeks liberty to approach the concerned bank for redressal of petitioner’s grievance, more particularly, in light of Clause 10 – Grievance Redressal Mechanism of Section III of the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) dated 02.01.2026 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. [2026:RJ-JP:20856] (2 of 2) [CW-7799/2026] 2. Taking note of the above limited submission, liberty as prayed for is granted to the petitioner. 3. In the event, the petitioner approaches the competent authorities in terms of the said SOP, the concerned authorities of the State and the Bank are directed to ensure that the grievance of the petitioner is duly considered strictly in accordance with the terms as provided in the SOP and within the time-frame prescribed therein. The timeline stipulated under the said SOP shall be mandatorily and strictly adhered to by the concerned authorities. 4. It is made clear that the aforesaid direction has been issued only on the request of the petitioner. The same shall not be construed as an order to address the petitioner's grievance in any particular manner, and the concerned State and Bank authorities shall address the grievance of the petitioner, independently and strictly in accordance with law. 5. With the aforesaid liberty and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 6. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. 7. However, if even after availing the remedies as provided under the Grievance Redressal Mechanism of the said SOP before the competent authorities, the petitioner’s grievance or cause of action still survives, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail appropriate legal remedies in accordance with law, if so advised. (MANEESH SHARMA),J DEEPA-24