Manoj Maru vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:28216)
2025 Latest Caselaw 1625 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Manoj Maru vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:28216) on 1 July, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:28216]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4609/2025

Manoj Maru S/o Hanuman Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Sargaro Ka Bas Village , Nandwan, Police Station Vivek Vihar,
Jodhpur West, Rajasthan.
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Gunjan      Parihar     S/o     Ramesh          Chandra     Parihar,   R/o
         Sardarpura B Road Jodhpur
                                                                   ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Naman Mohnot
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Sri Ram Choudhary, PP



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

01/07/2025

1. By way of filing the present criminal miscellaneous petition

under Section 528 BNSS (Section 482 Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has

prayed for the following reliefs:-

"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Criminal Misc. Petition may kindly be allowed and requested to stay on further investigation in connection with the F.I.R. No.115/2024 has been lodged against the petitioner in P.S. Mahamandir, District- Jodhpur city east, Rajasthan and consequential Proceeding in pursuance of the said FIR for Offence under Sections 447, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 120-Bof Indian Penal Code, 1860, may kindly be quashed and set-aside.

Any other appropriate relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in favors of the petitioner, may kindly be passed."

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material as made available to this Court as well as gone through

the niceties of the matter.

[2025:RJ-JD:28216] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-4609/2025]

3. Having perused the impugned FIR, this Court prima facie

finds that the offences alleged to have been committed by the

petitioners are either triable by a court of Magistrate and/or do not

contain the maximum punishment of more than seven years, and

keeping in mind the provisions contained in Section 35 BNSS

(Section 41, 41-A Cr.P.C.) as well as the judgment passed by

Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs.

State of Bihar, reported in AIR 2014 SC 2756, the dictum of

which squarely apply mutatis mutandis to the present case, it is

directed that in case, the arrest of the petitioner is found to be

absolutely necessary by the Investigating Agencies, instead of

affecting the arrest of the petitioner at once, a prior notice of 20

days shall be given to him so that he may exercise his rights.

Needless to say that the petitioner is not precluded from raising

his grievance before the trial Court.

4. With the aforesaid direction, the misc. petition filed under

Section 528 BNSS (482 Cr.P.C.) as well as stay application are

disposed of.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 53-divya/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)