Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Nitin Dosi vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:8237) on 10 February, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:8237]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 765/2025
Nitin Dosi S/o Sh. Narendra, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Flat Nol 8
A-2, Siddharth Residency, Motiba Nagar, DPS Circle Ke Pas,
Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Nikhil Purohit, R/o 8/9/10, Bhagwandas Road, Ground
Floor, Silver Square Mall, Jaipur. Cyber Ps Up Aayukt
(Crime) Aayuktalaya, Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Puri
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Chandawat, Dy.G.A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
10/02/2025
1. The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C./
528 BNSS has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing of FIR
No.7/2023 registered at Police Station Cyber Police Station,
Deputy Commissionarate (Crime) Commissionerate Jodhpur for
the offence under Sections 420, 406, 120-B fo the IPC and Section
66-C and 66-D of the IT Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for quashing the
aforementioned FIR and all further proceedings in pursuant
thereof.
3. Per contra, learned Deputy Government Advocate opposes
the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner for quashing
of the FIR and all further proceedings in pursuant thereof.
[2025:RJ-JD:8237] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-765/2025]
4. The petitioner is not named in the FIR so also while keeping
the investigation pending under sub clause 8 Section 173 of the
Cr.P.C., his name was not mentioned there. Now, in relation to an
offence under Information Technology, the Agency is trying to
book him although he has not committed any offence.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going
through the niceties of the matter, this Court feels that though no
case for quashing of the FIR is made out but there are certain
circumstances persuading to this Court to pass an appropriate
order so that fundamental right of the petitioner regarding his
liberty may be protected since the offences alleged against the
petitioner are triable by the Court of Magistrate and do not contain
the maximum punishment of more than 7 years, therefore, the
provisions contained under Sections 41 and 41A of the CrPC/
Section 35 of BNSS are applicable mutatis mutandis and the
judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in AIR 2014 SC
2756 applies squarely in the present case.
6. In this view of the matter, the instant criminal misc. petition
is disposed of with the following directions :-
(i) The petitioner shall not be arrested during the entire
course of investigation.
(ii) In the event offence is found to be proved and
charge-sheet is to be submitted then instead of affecting
arrest, the petitioner shall be directed to remain
present before the trial court, where the charge-sheet
would be submitted.
[2025:RJ-JD:8237] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-765/2025]
(iii) On the day of filing of the charge-sheet and upon the
appearance of the petitioner, he shall move a regular
bail application and whereupon the learned trial Court
shall release him on bail on the very same day; on the
amount of surety and bond as it deems fit.
7. Stay petition also stands disposed of.
8. Nothing precluded the petitioner to raise his grounds before
the learned trial Court at appropriate stage.
(FARJAND ALI),J
58-Ashutosh/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
