Mukul Soni vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:29497)
2025 Latest Caselaw 2003 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mukul Soni vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:29497) on 8 July, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:29497]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                  S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5224/2025

Mukul Soni S/o Sheshmal Soni, Aged About 30 Years, Roop
Nagar, Jalore, Raj.
                                                                          ----Petitioner
                                          Versus
1.          State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.          Smt. Surabhi Jain W/o Prakash Mal Modi, Kakariya Vas,
            Jalore, Raj.
                                                                       ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)               :     Mr. Hanuman Ram
For Respondent(s)               :     Mr. Narendra Gehlot, PP



              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

08/07/2025

1. By way of filing the present criminal misc. petition under

Section 528 BNSS, the petitioner has prayed for the following

reliefs:-

"It is, therefore, prayed that this criminal misc. petition under section 528 of BNSS may kindly be allowed and FIR No.00171/2025 dtd. 05.06.2025 u/section 316(2) and 318(4) of BNS, 2023 in PS Jalore District Jalore, may kindly be quashed and present petition may be allowed. ...."

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.

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

finds that the offences alleged to have been committed by the

petitioner 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

[2025:RJ-JD:29497] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-5224/2025]

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

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

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

squarely applies 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 at an appropriate stage.

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 46-divya/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)