Sohan Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:40028)
2024 Latest Caselaw 8281 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Sohan Lal vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:40028) on 20 September, 2024

[2024:RJ-JD:40028]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3076/2024

Sohan Lal S/o Mangala Ram, Aged About 71 Years, R/o
Chavndiya, Jaitaran, Sojat City, Pali, Rajasthan, Presently R/o
Himmat Nagar, Gujrat.
                                                                            ----Petitioner
                                            Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       The Superintendent Of Police, Pali.
3.       The Police Station Sojat City, Pali.
4.       Om Prakash S/o Dhana Ram, R/o Bera Ptaliya, Dorndi,
         Sojat City , Pali.
5.       Nisha D/o Ramuji, R/o Badva, Khrgon, Dist. Khargon,
         Madhyapradesh. Presently R/o Prem Nagar Moghadi,
         Khandwa, Madhya Pradesh.
6.       Mangi Lal Chouhan S/o Bhomar Singh, R/o Bdva, Khrgon,
         Madhya Pradesh.
7.       Bhaiya Lal S/o Mangal Singh, R/o Prem Nagar, Mogadi,
         Khndva, Madhyapradesh.
8.       Paras Ram S/o Unknown, R/o Namalum, Sojat City, Pali,
         Raj.
                                                                         ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)                 :    Mr. Harendra Singh Inda.
For Respondent(s)                 :    Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP with
                                       Mr. R.S. Bhati.



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order

20/09/2024

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.0018/2024 dated

25.01.2024, registered under Sections 406, 420, 380 & 120-B of

IPC, at Police Station Sojat City, District Pali.

2. Heard.

[2024:RJ-JD:40028] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3076/2024]

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 45-skm/-

1 2008 (2) SCC 409

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)