Abhishek Meena S/O Shri Laxmi Chand ... vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:12223)
2024 Latest Caselaw 1694 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

Abhishek Meena S/O Shri Laxmi Chand ... vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jp:12223) on 11 March, 2024

Author: Sudesh Bansal

Bench: Sudesh Bansal

[2024:RJ-JP:12223]

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                     BENCH AT JAIPUR

         S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4491/2023

Abhishek Meena S/o Shri Laxmi Chand Meena, Aged About 22
Years, R/o Vpo-Aadalwara Kalan, Tehsil Choth Ka Barwada,
District Sawaimadhopur (Raj.)
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Aatif Juber S/o Abdul Kalam, R/o Dobda Kalan, Kotwali
         Sawaimadhopur, District Sawaimadhopur (Raj.) Presently
         Resident Of Chak Chainpura, Kotwali Sawaimadhopur,
         District Sawaimadhopur (Raj.)
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Amit Jindal,
                                Mr. G S Gautam
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Babu Lal Nasuna, PP.



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

                                     Order

11/03/2024

1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under

Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the FIR No.438/2022

registered at Police Station Kotwali, Sawaimadhopur, District

Sawaimadhopur for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323,

307 of IPC and Section 3 and 25 of Arms Act, 1959 (as amended

2019).

2. Counsel for petitioner has argued that the name of petitioner is

not specifically named in the FIR and rather name of one Abhishek

Lodha, resident of Village Aatun is indicated in the FIR whereas

petitioner is Abhishek Meena yet the Investigating Officer is going

to implicate the petitioner in this FIR.

[2024:RJ-JP:12223] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-4491/2023]

3. Learned Public Prosecution has opposed the prayer.

4. Heard and considered.

5. This Court has perused contents of the FIR and the contents

of FIR, if, taken on its face value, same gives rise to a cognizable

offence for investigation, which pertains to opening of firearms by

a group of persons and name of one Abhishek Lodha accompanied

with other 7-8 persons is indicated. The fact that name of

petitioner is not correctly indicated in the FIR or not, is a subject

matter of investigation and on this ground, the impugned FIR is

not liable to be quashed, qua petitioner.

6. The parameters to quash the FIR by the High Court in

exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC have

been expounded by the Supreme Court, by and large in the

celebrated judgment passed in case of R.P. Kapur vs. State of

Punjab [AIR 1960 SC 866]and State of Haryana Vs.

Choudhary Bhajan Lal [1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335], which have

been followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court recently in case of

M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of

Maharashtra, [2021 SCC OnLine SC 315],

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the celebrated judgment in

case of Bhajan Lal (supra) expounded about seven categories,

which are though not exhaustive, yet the present case does not

fall in any of the category set out by the Apex Court. The Apex

Court in case of V. Ravi Kujmar Vs. State [(2019) 14 SCC

568] has held that it is wholly impermissible for the High Court

to enter into the factual arena to adjudge the correctness of the

allegation in the complaint.

[2024:RJ-JP:12223] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-4491/2023]

8. For aforesaid reasons and discussion, this Court does not find

the present case to be a fit case to quash the impugned FIR in

exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. As a result, there is

no substance in the instant miscellaneous petition and the same is

hereby dismissed.

9. Stay application and any other pending application(s), if any,

also stand(s) disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL), J

AS/363

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)