Dhanaram vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 9950 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4097/2022

Dhanaram S/o Shri Kanaram, Aged About 61 Years, B/c Vishnoi, R/o Vishnu Nagar, Dugar, Tehsil Balesar, Dist. Jodhpur.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. The Superintendent Of Police, Jodhpur Village.

3. Station House Officer, Police Station Shergarh, Dist.

Jodhpur.

                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)             :     Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi
                                    Mr. Jayram Saran
For Respondent(s)             :     Mr. SK Bhati, PP



                         JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

                                         Order

28/07/2022

1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has challenged

the FIR No.0140 dated 12.06.2022, registered at Police Station

Shergarh, District Jodhpur (Rural), alleging offences under

Sections 420, 406, 409 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code said

to have been committed by the petitioner.

2. Mr. Bishnoi, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that on

the same allegation, the complainant, i.e. the then Tehsildar

Sekhala, Jodhpur (Rural) had lodged an FIR (144) dated

27.05.2022 at Police Station Dechu, in which it was clearly stated

that the present petitioner who was the then Patwari of Patwari

Circle Bhalu Anopgarh was not having computer related

knowledge and thus, was not guilty and the forgery has been

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-4097/2022]

committed by the computer operator Kanwarraj Singh. But in the

subsequent FIR, which is impugned herein, she has made

accusation against the present petitioner.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the

subsequent FIR being FIR No.140/2022, registered at Police

Station Shergarh, cannot continue.

4. In support of his argument aforesaid, learned counsel for the

petitioner relied upon the judgment dated 19.05.2020 of hon'ble

the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Arnab Ranjan

Goswami Vs. Union of Indian & Ors in Writ Petition (Criminal)

No.130/2020 and AR Antulay Vs. RS Nayak reported in AIR 1988

(SC) 1531.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor is not in a position to dispute

the aforesaid position of facts and law.

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

the impugned FIR No.140, registered at Police Station Shergarh,

District Jodhpur (Rural) which is subsequent in time is hereby

quashed.

7. The present petition stands allowed.

8. The stay petition also stands disposed of accordingly.

9. Needless to observe that the Investigating Officer concerned

shall be free to continue investigation regarding petitioner's role in

the other FIR (FIR No.144/2022 at Police Station Dechu).

(DINESH MEHTA),J 252-pooja/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)