Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Vikas Singh Shekhawat vs State on 10 January, 2022
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2408/2020
Vikas Singh Shekhawat S/o Sh. Narendra Singh Shekhawat,
Aged About 40 Years, B/c Rajput, R/o Hotel Safayar, Ambavgarh,
Udaipur, District Udaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State, Through PP
2. Kalpana Kunwar D/o Sh. Pratap Singh Rathore, B/c
Rajput, R/o Sector No. 6, Udaipur, Dist. Udaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.S. Rajpurohit (through VC)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP
Mr. Rajendra Singh Rathore (through
VC)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order
10/01/2022
This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 CrPC
has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for
quashing FIR No.48/2020 of Police Station Bhupalpura,
Distt. Udaipur for the offence under Section 376 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the complainant has lodged a false FIR against the
petitioner. It is argued that the complainant is a habitual
blackmailer and in the year 2017 also, she lodged a
similar type of complaint at Police Station Hiranmagri,
(2 of 4) [CRLMP-2408/2020]
Distt. Udaipur against one Ranglal, wherein the police
after through investigation has filed a negative final
report in the matter. Learned counsel has argued that as
a matter of fact, the present FIR has been lodged against
the petitioner only with the intention to blackmail him. It
is further argued that prior to filing of the FIR, the
complainant along with other persons had extorted
money from the petitioner and when the petitioner
refused to give the same, this false FIR has been lodged
against him. It is submitted that as a matter of fact,
earlier, the complainant has only filed complaint to the
effect that the petitioner had misbehaved with her, but
later on, she improved her complaint and false allegation
of sexual assault has been leveled against him. It is also
submitted that in relation to the extortion carried out by
the complainant and other persons, the petitioner has
filed an FIR No.55/2020 at Police Station Bhupalpura,
wherein the police has concluded that the complainant
and other persons had illegally extorted money from the
petitioner. It is, thus, prayed that the impugned FIR may
be quashed.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as
learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2
(3 of 4) [CRLMP-2408/2020]
have opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted a factual
report, wherein it is mentioned that the police after
thorough investigation and taking into consideration the
statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 161
and 164 CrPC during the course of investigation has
found that case for offence punishable under Section 376
IPC is made out against the petitioner.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties; after
going through the factual report as well as the contents
of the FIR, I am of the opinion that from a bare reading
of the contents of the FIR, commission of offence is made
out.
So far as contentions of learned counsel for the
petitioner that the complainant is a habitual blackmailer
and she has lodged this false FIR with the intention to
extort money and the same have been found proved by
the police in the FIR lodged by him are concerned, the
said contentions are raised by learned counsel for the
petitioner in defence of the petitioner, however, at this
stage, defence of the petitioner cannot be taken into
consideration.
(4 of 4) [CRLMP-2408/2020]
In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition
being devoid of merit is hereby dismissed.
Stay petition is also dismissed.
The factual report submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor is taken on record.
(VIJAY BISHNOI),J
4 - ms rathore
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
