Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shri Shekhar vs State Of Rajasthan on 20 December, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc. Appli No. 382/2022
1. Shri Shekhar S/o Late Jagdish, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
H.no. D-333A, Kabir Basti, Malka Ganj, Delhi- 110007.
2. Shri Kuldeep Kumar Spouse/o Late Jagdish Kumar, Aged
About 45 Years, R/o D-381 Kabir Basti Subzi Mandi Malka
Ganj Delhi-110007
3. Smt. Shefali @ Kanchan W/o Shri Kuleep Kumari, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o H.no. D-381 Kabir Basti Subzi Mandi
Malka Ganj Delhi -110007
4. Shri Ashok Kumar S/o Late Om Prakash, Aged About 43
Years, R/o 33/1 Mahavir Nagar Bhuteshwar Mathura U.p.
-281004
5. S.m.t. Shalini W/o Shri Ashok Kumar, Aged About 45
Years, R/o 33/1 Mahavir Ngar Bhuteshwar Mathura U.p. -
281004
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt. Sarla W/o Shri Shekhar D/o Shri Radhey Lal Verma,
Aged About 39 Years, R/o Type-I/16 N.c.e.r.t. Campus Sri
Aurbindo Marg Ps Hauz Khas New Delhi-110016
3. The State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P And Another
----Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr, Sharwan Choudhary
Mr. Hanuman Singh
For Respondents : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, P.P.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Judgment
Reserved on 16/12/2022
Pronounced on 20/12/2022
1. This Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has
been preferred claiming the following reliefs:-
"It is, therefore, humbly and respectfully prayed that in
view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances:
(i) The present application of the petitioner/s may kindly be
allowed and grant opportunity for submissions to the applicant
in the CrL.M.P. No. 3018/2020;
(ii) Stay the operation of FIR No. 0085, PS: Mahila Thana,
Udaipur till final disposal of the petition;
(iii) Stay the operation of the order dated 19.10.2022, in the
interest of justice, till final disposal of the case.
OR any other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem
fit and proper may be passed in favour of the petitioners"
(2 of 3) [CRLMA-382/2022]
2. The present application assails an order passed by this Court
on 19.10.2022; whereby S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.
3018/2020, praying for quashing of F.I.R. No. 85/2020 registered
at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Udaipur, for the offences
under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC was disposed off, in light of the
submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor therein and the
factual report submitted, which revealed that the charge-sheet
was chalked out, and the aforesaid offences having been prima
facie made out against the applicant-petitioner, and the liberty to
the petitioner to take up all his legal issues before the learned Trial
Court at the appropriate stage, and file bail bonds before the
learned Trial Court at time of filing charge-sheet.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that at the time
of the hearing of the case of the aforesaid petition, the learned
counsel was unable to appear before this Court, and that the
order, as discussed hereinabove, was passed in his absence.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the
Court has the power to quash an FIR despite the fact that a char-
sheet has been chalked out/filed.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the judgment
rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Daxaben v.
State of Gujarat & Ors. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1061-1084 of
2022 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 1132-1155 of 2022)
decided on 29.07.2022.
Relevant portion of the said judgment, as relied upon, by learned
counsel for the applicant, is reproduced hereinunder:-
"24. Be that as it may, since the initial order dated 20th
October 2020 is also under challenge in these appeals, it is
really not necessary for this Court to delve deeper into the
question of whether a final order passed Under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure quashing an FIR could have, at
all, been recalled by the High Court, in the absence of any
specific provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure for recall
(3 of 3) [CRLMA-382/2022]
and/or review of such order. The High Court has, in effect,
held that in exceptional circumstances, such orders can be
recalled, in exercise of the inherent power of the High Court, to
prevent injustice"
6. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the
present application and submitted that the impugned order has
been rightly passed, looking into the overall facts and
circumstances of the present case.
7. Heard learned counsel for both parties as well as perused
the record of the case and the judgment cited at the Bar.
8. This Court observes that the power to quash an FIR and
all proceedings pursuant thereto, is a power, which may be
exercised even at the stage after a charge-sheet is chalked
out/filed, and the same is well within the inherent powers of
the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; the same having been
settled by way of a catena of judicial precedents; and as
placed before this Court on behalf of the applicant.
9. This Court however, observes that the present case, in
the given factual matrix, does not warrant the exercise of such
power and that the present application is without merit.
10. The Court also observes that the present applicant has
been granted the liberty to file bail bonds before the learned
Trial Court at the time of filing of charge-sheet, and to take up
all his legal issues before the learned Court below at the
appropriate stage.
11. As an upshot of the above discussion, the present
application is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stand
disposed off.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
SKant/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
