Rajendra Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:24921)
2025 Latest Caselaw 10085 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rajendra Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:24921) on 22 May, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:24921]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3559/2025

Rajendra Choudhary S/o Rameshwar Lal, Aged About 35 Years,
Resdient Of Village Kuroli Tehsil Chhoti Khatu, District Deedwana
Kuchaman.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Pp
2.       Jagmal Dhatarwal S/o Dhala Ram, Aged About 27 Years,
         Resdient Of Village Koliya, Tehsil Deedwana, Distric
         Deedwana Kuchaman
                                                                 ----Respondents


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



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

22/05/2025

1. The factual report dated 07.05.2025 received by the learned

Public Prosecutor from the office of SHO, P.S. Khunkhuna, District

Deedwana- Kuchaman is taken on record.

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 and the factual report

dated 07.05.2025, 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 41, 41-A Cr.P.C. as well as the

[2025:RJ-JD:24921] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3559/2025]

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 one month 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.

6. 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 52-divya/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)