Rajasthan High Court
Gopal Krishan Son Of Late Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:2838) on 17 January, 2024
Author: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
[2024:RJ-JP:2838]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6478/2023
Gopal Krishan Son Of Late Shri Prabhudayal, Aged About 54
Years, Resident Of Village Lakhni, Police Station Shahpura,
Jaipur, Rajasthan At Present Resident Of 40-A, Shri Ramnagar,
Murlipura, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
2. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter Jaipur.
3. Commissioner Of Police Jaipur, Office Of Police
Commissionerate, Jaipur.
4. Station House Officer, Police Station Banipark, Jaipur
(Raj).
5. Investigation Officer, Police Station Banipark, Jaipur (Raj).
6. Hanuman Sahay Son Of Late Shri Kanhaiya Lal, Aged
About 88 Years, Resident Of Lakhani, Police Station
Shahpura At Present Resident Of B-58, Sikar House
Colony, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Saini
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ghanshyam Singh Rathore, GA
cum AAG assisted by
Ms. Kratika Jaiman
Mr. Atul Sharma, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Judgment / Order
17/01/2024
This criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482
Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the FIR No.0055 dated
01.04.2023 lodged by the respondent No.5/complainant (for
brevity "the complainant") against the petitioner registered at
[2024:RJ-JP:2838] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6478/2023]
Police Station Banipark, District Jaipur (West) for offence under
Section(s) 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since, as per
the latest mutation entry and other relevant documents, the
subject land is not recorded in the Khatedari of the complainant,
he had no locus to lodge the instant FIR inasmuch as neither he
was subjected to any cheating nor, the subject document, even if
forged, affect his rights in the property. He further submits that
the subject FIR has been lodged only to harass and victimize the
petitioner. He, therefore, prays that the criminal miscellaneous
petition be allowed and the subject FIR be quashed.
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.
Heard. Considered.
A perusal of the subject FIR reveals that it is alleged therein
that to deprive the complainant from his rights in the subject
agricultural land situated in village Lakhni Patwar Halka Kant, the
petitioner has forged the will dated 24.05.2022 allegedly executed
by Shri Mahadev Prasad Joshi, his elder brother. The FIR contains
instances which, as per the complainant, establish the will to be
forged. Since, the FIR discloses commission of cognizable
offence(s), it cannot be quashed by this Court under Section 482
CrPC. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner qua
locus of the complainant to lodge the FIR is wholly misconceived.
It is trite law that in criminal jurisprudence, if the FIR discloses
commission of a cognizable offence, the question of locus of the
complainant is of no significance. Even otherwise also, there is
specific allegation in the FIR that to deprive the complainant of his
right in the subject agricultural land, the petitioner forged the will.
[2024:RJ-JP:2838] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6478/2023]
Further, except making bald averments that the complainant has
no right in the subject property, attention of this Court has not
been drawn towards any specific document to substantiate the
averment.
Resultantly, this criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed
being devoid of merit.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Manish/666
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
