Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 5094 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 583/2019

1. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Narayan, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Mohawda, P.S. Mavalwada Khala Kotra, Distt. Udaipur.

2. Ram Lal @ Ramu S/o Shri Panna Lala Dangi, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Dangi Khera, Palna Khurd, P.S. Ghasa, Distt. Udaipur.

3. Mahesh Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Mangi Lal Sharma, Aged About 49 Years, R/o 77/4, Gandhi Nagar, R/o 77/4, Gandhi Nagar, Chittorgarh.

4. Amar Singh S/o Khuman Singh Rajput, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Morwal, Gogunda, Udaipur.

5. Manohar Singh S/o Khuman Singh Rajput, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Subhato Ka Guda, Gogunda, Udaipur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. The State Of Rajasthan

2. Gufran S/o Shri Irfan Ahmed Musalman, R/o Ayani, Kesarganj, Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Menaria For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati, Public Prosecutor

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

Order

05/04/2022

1. Challenging the FIR No.123/2018, registered at P.S.

Belwada, District Rajsamand for the offences punishable under

Sections 341, 392 & 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Mr.

Menaria, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the story

cooked up in the FIR in question is highly improbable and

unrealistic.

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-583/2019]

2. While pointing out that the Truck bearing registration No.GJ-

12-Y-7995, around which the story projected by the complainant

revolves, is lying seized in Gujarat, he argued that the FIR in

question narrates a false and improbable story, hence, the same

be quashed in the light of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme

Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan

Lal & Ors. reported in AIR 1992 SC 604.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor, on the query made by the Court,

submitted that since petitioners' arrest was stayed, the

interrogation/investigation could not be completed and, thus, he is

not in a position to apprise the Court about the

conclusion/development in the investigation. He nevertheless

submitted that the defense put forth by the petitioner is untenable

as the truck lying in Gujarat is having a dummy number plate.

4. It is not in dispute that petitioner No.1 and 2 have been

enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court and other

petitioners have also been granted interim protection from arrest

by order dated 11.03.2019.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case,

and considering the submissions made by learned Public

Prosecutor and the fact that the investigation is pending since

2018, this Court deems it expedient to dispose of the present

petition with the direction to the petitioners to join investigation

between 18.04.2022 to 20.04.2022. They may file their

representation with documents.

6. The Investigating Officer may carry out the investigation, but

shall not arrest the petitioners in relation to FIR No.123/2018, P.S.

Belwada, District Rajsamand.

                                                                           (3 of 3)                     [CRLMP-583/2019]



                                   7.   In    case   after    conclusion         of     the        Investigation,   the

Investigating Officer is of the view that any punishable offence is

made out against the petitioner(s), he shall issue a notice under

Section 41-A of the Code, against which petitioners' rights of

taking appropriate remedy shall stand reserved.

8. Stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

(DINESH MEHTA),J 173-Ramesh/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)