Arjun Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 16902 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6034/2021

Arjun Ram S/o Badri Ram, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Chatra Manjara, P.S. Sadar, Nagaur, District Nagaur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. Sampat Lal Meghwal, At Present Branch Manager, State Bank Of India, Birloka, Birloka, Tehsil Khinvsar, District Nagaur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.R. Punia, Sr. Adv. Assisted by Mr. Mahaveer Bhanwariya Mr. N.R. Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Judgment

12/11/2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the present

petition for quashing of the FIR No.92/2020 registered at Police

Station, Khinvsar, District Nagaur.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that he will

be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Investigating Authority

for fair and impartial investigation in the matter. He further

submits that the petitioner himself has approached the

investigating officer prior to the lodging of the FIR informing him

that his signatures have been forged on the search reports filed

for sanctioning of 13 loans from the State Bank of India.

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-6034/2021]

Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the signatures

of the petitioner on the search reports have been forged by one of

the authorized agent of the bank. This fact of forgery has also

been stated by the agent in the affidavit which is produced on

record. The agent has stated that he has affixed signatures on the

search reports fraudulently for the procurement of the loan. He

therefore, submits that the Investigating Agency may kindly be

directed to investigate the matter from this angle also by taking

the specimen signatures of the petitioner for getting the same

verified on the forged search reports.

Learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioner is a

practicing lawyer and has already been arrested in two FIRs and

the Investigating Agency has already made the custodial

interrogation of the petitioner and therefore, in other FIRs, no

useful purpose will be served by arresting the petitioner. The

petitioner is ready to cooperate with the Investigating Agency by

submitting all the requisite documents.

Learned Public Prosecutor assures this Court that the

investigation in the matter will be done impartially and the

signatures allegedly having been forged by the agent on the

search reports will be verified in a fair and impartial manner.

In this view of the matter the present petition is disposed of

with a direction to the Investigating Agency to investigate the

matter fairly and impartially including the taking of the specimen

signatures of the petitioner for verification of the same on the

allegedly forged signatures on search reports.

Since the petitioner has already been arrested in two FIRs

wherein, the allegations are almost on the same lines and he is

ready to cooperate with the Investigating Agency, it is directed

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-6034/2021]

that if the Investigating Agency finds any incriminating material

against the petitioner and custodial interrogation is required in the

matter then the Investigating Agency will give a notice of seven

days under Section 41A Cr.P.C. prior to the arrest of the petitioner.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 204-Shahenshah/Vivek-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)