Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Smt. Prem Devi Khandelwal Wife Of ... vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 393 Raj/2

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 393 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 18 January, 2022

Rajasthan High Court
Smt. Prem Devi Khandelwal Wife Of ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 18 January, 2022
Bench: Farjand Ali
      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

       S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 347/2022

1.     Smt. Prem Devi Khandelwal Wife Of Shri Satya Narayan
       Khandelwal, Aged About 52 Years, Resident Of Flat No. S-
       Ii, Plot No. 18, Swarn Vihar, Muhana Mandi Road, Jaipur
       (Rajasthan)
2.     Smt. Gyan Devi Wife Of Late Shri Jagdish Prasad Agrawal,
       Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of Flat No. G-1, Plot No.
       18 Swarn Vihar, Muhana Mandi Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan)
3.     Smt. Pushpa Sharma Wife Of Shri Laxman Swaroop
       Sharma, Aged About 64 Years, Resident Of Flat No. G-2,
       Plot No. 18 Swarn Vihar, Muhana Mandi Road, Jaipur
       (Rajasthan)
4.     Hitesh       Kumar      Khandelwal           Son          Of     Satyanarayan
       Khendelwal, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of Flat No. S-
       1, Plot No. 18 Swarn Vihar, Muhana Mandi Road, Jaipur
       (Rajasthan)
5.     Shri Ankush Biloriya Son Of Shri Babu Lal Saini, Aged
       About 42 Years, Resident Of Flat No. F-2, Plot No. 18
       Swarn Vihar, Muhana Mandi Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan)
6.     Akhilesh Son Of Ramesh Chand, Aged About 35 Years,
       Resident Of Flat No. F-1, Plot No. 18 Swarn Vihar, Muhana
       Mandi Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan)
7.     Surendra Son Of Shri Radheyshyam, Resident Of Flat No.
       1,stilt Floor, Plot No. 18 Swarn Vihar, Muhana Mandi Road,
       Jaipur (Rajasthan)
                                                                        ----Petitioners
                                    Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through PP
2.     Rohit Srivastava Son Of Shri C.v. Srivastava, Enforcement
       Officer, Jaipur Development Authority, Resident Of C- 103,
       Sety Colony, Transport Nagar Jaipur (Rajasthan)
                                                                      ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.K. Garg through VC For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Kumar, PP

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-347/2022]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

18/01/2022

By way of filing the instant miscellaneous petition, challenge

has been made to the very lodging of the FIR No.1173/2021

registered at Police Station Muhana, District Jaipur City (South) for

offence under Sections 453, 379 & 120B IPC and Section 3 of the

PDPP Act, 1984.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

Public Prosecutor. Gone through the contents of the FIR and the

other material made available on record.

After going through the nature of allegations leveled in the

FIR and the nature of the offence, this Court does not deem it

appropriate to quash the FIR impugned and to hamper the course

of investigation. However, looking to the totality of facts and

circumstances of the case and the fact that the offence is

exclusively triable by the Court of Magistrate or Section 41 of

Cr.P.C. applies and looking to the applicability of the judgment

passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of Arnesh Kumar

Vs. State of Bihar & Anr. [(2014) 8 SCC 273], while exercising

the extraordinary powers available with this Court, I deem it

appropriate to direct the petitioners to submit a detailed

representation to the concerned Superintendent of Police averring

therein all the grounds which have been raised in this petition

within a period of 20 days from the date of receipt of this order.

In the event, the representation is submitted, the concerned

Superintendent of Police is directed to consider the

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-347/2022]

submissions/grounds raised in the representation, and instruct the

concerned Investigating Officer to conduct fair, impartial and

expeditious investigation in the matter.

The requisite endorsement shall be made in the case diary as

to the consideration of the representation.

It is made clear that until the submissions of the accused-

petitioners are not considered or the final result is not reached;

the accused-petitioners shall not be arrested. If still thereafter it is

decided that the arrest has become imperative; they would be

given 15 days notice prior to affect the arrest.

It is directed to the officers to strictly follow the provisions of

law and the judgment referred above, it should not be taken as a

formality.

In the event, the grievance of the petitioners persists, the

petitioners would be at liberty to approach this Court again.

Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition is disposed of.

The stay application also stands disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J

SAHIL SONI /98

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter