Rawal Chand vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 15668 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4330/2021

Rawal Chand S/o Sh. Harkha Ram, Aged About 21 Years, Jasodo Ki Beri, Pareu, P.s. Gida, Dist. Barmer (Raj.). At Present Hostel Warden B.r. Public School Bhaniyana, Dist. Jaisalmer (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Aaidanram S/o Heera Ram, B/c Jat, R/o Bhanu Nagar, Bhikhodai, P.s. Phalsund, Dist. Jaisalmer (Raj.).

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Binja Ram Jajra
For Complainant(s)       :     Mr. Naman Mohnot
For State                :     Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP



          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

                         Judgment / Order

18/10/2021

1. Petitioner has preferred this misc. petition seeking quashing

of F.I.R. No.09/2021.

2. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner

was only a warden of the hostel. There is no allegation against

him that he has abetted the commission of the offence of suicide.

It is also contended that petitioner was arrested and was given

benefit of bail. Till date, there is no evidence on record to

implicate the petitioner for the alleged offence.

3. Counsel for the complainant and learned Public Prosecutor

have opposed the misc. petition. It is contended that the

manager/owner of the hostel has also filed misc. petition before

the High Court bearing Criminal Misc. Petition No.3123/2021 "Om

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-4330/2021]

Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr." which was disposed

by the High Court on 12.07.2021, permitting the petitioner therein

to move appropriate representation before the Investigating

Officer. It is also contended that petitioner's name is appearing in

the F.I.R. and the complainant has mentioned in the F.I.R. that he

has doubt that the present petitioner is also involved in the

alleged offence of suicide.

4. Counsel for the complainant has placed reliance on

"Narayan Malhari Thorat Vs. Vinayak Deorao Bhagat And

Anr.": Criminal Appeal No.1487/2018 decided by the Apex Court

on 28.11.2018, wherein the Apex Court has held that when the

investigation was yet to be completed and charge-sheet, if any,

was yet to be filed, the High Court ought not to have gone into the

aspect whether there was requisite mental element or intention on

part of the accused-respondent.

5. I have considered the contentions.

6. F.I.R. discloses commission of cognizable offence. Petitioner

is named in the F.I.R. and the complainant has mentioned that he

has doubt that petitioner is involved in the case. The matter is still

at the stage of investigation and this Court at this stage cannot

come to the conclusion that petitioner is not involved in the

alleged offence so as to invoke the inherent powers.

7. In view of the judgment of the "Narayan Malhari Thorat

Vs. Vinayak Deorao Bhagat And Anr." (supra), this Court does

not deem it proper to entertain the present petition at this stage

when the matter is still at the stage of investigation. However

taking note of the fact that in a case pertaining to similar situated

co-accused, High Court has disposed the petition and has

permitted the petitioner therein to move appropriate

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-4330/2021]

representation to the Investigating Officer, hence, the present

misc. petition deserves to be disposed on same terms.

8. Accordingly, Criminal Misc. Petition is disposed of. Stay

application also stands disposed. Direction is given to the

petitioner to move appropriate representation to the concerned

Investigating Officer. Investigating Officer shall consider the

representation strictly in accordance with law and petitioner shall

be at liberty to file fresh petition, in case, need arises.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

Arti Sharma/ 22

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)