Premraj Bakoliya vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 2955 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 579/2022

Premraj Bakoliya S/o Shri Paliram, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Mandrela Road, Near Birdichand Ka Kua, Ward No. 54, Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Shakti Singh Bhati S/o Shri Bheru Singh Bhati, R/o Mahidem Banswara, District Banswara (Raj.)

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. L.D. Khatri For Respondent(s) : Mr. Laxman Solanki, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

23/02/2022

This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has

been preferred on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of FIR

No.404/2021, Police Station Banswara, District Banswara lodged

at the instance of the respondent No.2, who has alleged that the

petitioner and other co-accused persons had promised that they

will provide employment to the unemployed students in the

government department and for that they have to deposit some

amount.

The complainant has alleged that on the assurance given by

the petitioner, they have collected money from some of the

students and handed over to the petitioner, but the petitioner did

not provide any job to them and when they asked to return their

money, he has refused to do so. The complainant has further

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-579/2022]

alleged that the petitioner has committed offence of cheating and

misappropriation of money.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

allegations levelled against the petitioner in the impugned FIR are

false. It is submitted that the petitioner has not received any

money from the unemployed students and, therefore, no offence

is made out against him.

It is thus submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that

the impugned FIR may be quashed.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the criminal misc.

petition and submitted that it is the petitioner, who gave false

assurance to the complainant that he will provide job to the

unemployed students and on his assurance the students had paid

money to the complainant, which he handed over to the petitioner.

Learned Public Prosecutor has also submitted that the petitioner

has no capacity to provide appointment to any person and with

the intention to cheat the unemployed students, he gave false

promise and deceived them.

Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted the factual report

wherein, it is mentioned that as many as five cases of similar

nature containing same allegations are pending against the

petitioner Jhunjhunu District.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the

impugned FIR.

In the Impugned FIR, it is specifically alleged by the

complainant that the petitioner while giving false promise of

providing government job to the unemployed students has

received money from them. Whether these allegations are correct

or not, is a matter of investigation and it is settled that while

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-579/2022]

exercising powers under Sections 482 Cr.P.C in a case of quashing

of FIR, this Court should not go into the truthfulness of the

allegations levelled in the FIR.

From a bare reading of the contents of the FIR, case for

commission of offence is made out.

Hence, there is no force in this criminal misc. petition and

the same is hereby dismissed.

The factual report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor

is taken on record.

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J 33-mohit/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)