Mrs. Priyanka Vaibhav Lodha W/O ... vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 2524 Raj/2

           HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                       BENCH AT JAIPUR

                   D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 21622/2019

     Mrs. Priyanka Vaibhav Lodha W/o Shri Vaibhav Lodha
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
     Union Of India
                                                                     ----Respondent

Connected With D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4134/2021 Rahul Modi S/o. Sh. Virendra Modi

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5751/2021 Virendra Modi S/o Sh. Prakash Raj Modi

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. H.V. Nandwana Mr. P.C. Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.D. Rastogi, ASG with Mr. Akshay Bhardwaj & Mr. Devesh Yadav Mr. Rajesh Maharshi, AAG with Mr. Udit Sharma Mr. Anand Sharma Mr. Aditya Singh Mr. Rajat Choudhary Mr. Rajendra Yadav, GA-cum-AAG

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

24/03/2022

We have heard learned counsel for both the sides at

length today. While learned counsel for the respondents raised

(2 of 2) [CW-21622/2019]

serious objections with regard to territorial jurisdiction as the relief

sought in the writ petitions is with regard to institution of criminal

case in the State of Haryana, learned counsel for the petitioner

while submitting at length argued that since the institution of

criminal proceedings, in the court of Magistrate in State of

Haryana are without jurisdiction, only the court in the State of

Rajasthan will have the power to try the offence and the High

Court has also the territorial jurisdiction. He would submit in this

regard to satisfy the court that even though cognizance has been

taken by a Magistrate in the State of Haryana, if the Magistrate

does not have the jurisdiction, this Court will have the jurisdiction

to interfere with the orders and proceedings of the Magistrate in

the State of Haryana. He prays for some time to place before the

court materials/judgments.

Having considered the arguments at this stage we are

not inclined to continue the interim order.

At the request of the learned counsel for the

petitioners, list on 31.03.2022.

(SAMEER JAIN),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACTING CJ

JKP/115-117

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)