Shyam Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:38440)
2024 Latest Caselaw 8146 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Shyam Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:38440) on 18 September, 2024

[2024:RJ-JD:38440]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
              S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3041/2024
Shyam Lal S/o Shri Radha Kisham Mali, Aged About 38 Years, R/
o Prohitsar, Police Station Pokaran, Dist. Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
                                                       ----Petitioner
                               Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.     The Superintendent Of Police, Jaisalmer (Raj.)
3.     The Sho, P.s. Pokaran, Dist. Jaisalmer (Raj.)
4.     Smt. Sunita W/o Shri Jagdishram, Presently Sarpanch
       Gram Panchayat Morani, Tehsil Pokaran Dist. Jaisalmer, R/
       o Pabuipadiya, Tehsil Pokaran, Dist. Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
5.     Jagdistram S/o Shri Nainaram, R/o Pabuipadiya, Tehsil
       Pokaran, Dist. Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
6.     Vinod Choudhary, Gram Adhikari, Gram Panchayat Morani,
       Panchayat Samiti Sankra Headquarter Pokaran, Dist.
       Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
7.     Chotharam, Gram Vikas Adhikari, Gram Panchayat Morani,
       Panchayat Samiti Sankra Headquarter Pokaran, Dist.
       Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
8.     Smt. Pramila Meena, Manager Sahayak, Gram Panchayat
       Morani, Panchayat Samiti Sankra Headquarter Pokaran,
       Dist. Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
9.     Smt. Nirmal Meena, Manager Sahayak, Gram Panchayat
       Morani, Panchayat Samiti Sankra Headquarter Pokaran,
       Dist. Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
10.    Manak Lal S/o Shri Ishwarlal, Proprietor M.l. Construction
       Company, Gram Panchayat Morani, Panchayat Samiti
       Sankra Headquarter Pokaran, Dist. Jaisalmer, Rajasthan.
                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)                 :    Mr. Rahul Vyas.
For Respondent(s)                 :    Mr. S.R. Choudhary, PP


               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order

18/09/2024

1. Dissatisfied with the progress and manner of the

investigation, the petitioner/complainant seeks issuance of

directions to the respondents to conduct a fair

inquiry/investigation regarding FIR No.0178/2023 dated

04.10.2023, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-

A of IPC, at Police Station Pokran, District Jaisalmer.

2. Heard.

[2024:RJ-JD:38440] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3041/2024]

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the

investigating agency is not proceeding in a fair and just manner

and is intentionally stalling the investigation after registration of

FIR.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor appears on service of advance

copy of the petition and accepts notice on behalf of the State. He

opposes the petition arguing that once FIR was registered, law will

take its own course.

5. Be that as it may, in my opinion, the petitioner ought to have

availed of other available legal remedies for redressal of his

grievance before approaching this Court. Ordinarily, in cases of

grievances arising from unfair or improper investigation of an FIR,

the aggrieved person can seek recourse by approaching a superior

police officer as per Section 36 of Cr.P.C (now Section 30 of

BNSS). If the grievance remains unaddressed, one can then

approach a Magistrate of competent jurisdiction under Section

156(3) of Cr.P.C. (now Section 175(3) of BNSS), who can seek

submission of a report by the police. Reference may also be had to

Apex Court judgment in Sakiri Vasu versus State of U.P. and

Others1.

6. In the premise, instant petition is disposed of with liberty to

approach the appropriate forum for redressal of grievance, as

aforesaid.

7. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(ARUN MONGA),J 79-Rmathur/-

1 2008 (2) SCC 409

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)