Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Narendra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:22486) on 9 May, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:22486]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3312/2025
1. Narendra Singh S/o Shri Bhopal Singh, Aged About 31
Years, Resident Of Village Ratuja Tehsil And District Jalore
2. Dhirendra Singh S/o Bhopal Singh, Aged About 30 Years,
Resident Of Village Ratuja Tehsil And District Jalore
3. Shambhu S/o Bhopal Singh, Aged About 35 Years,
Resident Of Village Ratuja Tehsil And District Jalore
4. Indra Singh S/o Bhopal Singh, Aged About 40 Years,
Resident Of Village Ratuja Tehsil And District Jalore
5. Khimpal Singh S/o Shri Mohabat Singh, Aged About 29
Years, Resident Of Village Ratuja Tehsil And District Jalore
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Sho Ps Bhishangarh District
Jalore Rajasthan
2. Superintendent Of Police, Jalore
3. Shanti Lal S/o Shri Bheekha Ram, Resident Of Village
Tikhi Ps Bhishangarh District Jalore
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sriram Choudhary, PP.
Mr. Amit Mehta.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
09/05/2025
The factual report dated 06.05.2025 received by the learned
Public Prosecutor from the office of the SHO, Police Station
Bishangarh, District Jalore is taken on record. A perusal of the
factual report dated 06.05.2025 indicates that in the result of
investigation, the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and
[2025:RJ-JD:22486] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3312/2025]
120B of IPC have been prima facie founds to be proved against
the petitioners, at this stage.
2. In the opinion of this Court, since the FIR and the factual
report disclose the commission of cognizable offence thus, no case
for quashing of FIR is made out qua the present petitioners.
3. This Court upon a perusal of the case file 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 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 petitioners is found to be absolutely necessary by
the Investigating Agencies, instead of affecting the arrest of the
petitioners at once, a prior notice of one month shall be given to
them so that they may exercise their rights. Needless to say that
the petitioners are not precluded from raising their 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
64-Tikam/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
