Arun Prakash Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:50325)
2025 Latest Caselaw 15831 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Arun Prakash Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:50325) on 20 November, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:50325]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 9888/2025

Arun Prakash Sharma S/o Ramavtar Sharma, Aged About 55 Years, Resident Of B-32, Bhairav Nagar, Hatwara Road, Sodala, Jaipur

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

2. Mahaveer Singh, Additional Commissioner, Colonisation Vigilance, Bikaner

----Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. C.S. Kotwani For Respondents : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, PP

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Order

20/11/2025

1. The allegation against the petitioner Arun Prakash Sharma is

of having signed the orders, by which land was allotted of chak

No.9 NLD ad-measuring 15 bighas command and 7 bighas

uncommand, total 22 bighas at murabba No.1/54.

2. It is a case where allotment was made to one Niyale Khan

without placing the file before the Allotment Advisory Committee

and preparing the note-sheet at its own subsequent to the

meeting of the Allotment Advisory Committee.

3. The ACB has noticed the culpability of the petitioner in the

case and, therefore, no interference at this stage, is made out.

4. The arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is

on the basis of the provisions contained under Section 17(A) of

the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 to submit that no police

officer could have conducted or embarked on the inquiry or

(Uploaded on 21/11/2025 at 11:13:40 AM)

[2025:RJ-JD:50325] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-9888/2025]

investigation unless the offence is relatable to recommendations

made. This Court finds that the provisions of Section 17(A) of the

Act do not put an embargo on registering of the FIR, it is wholly

after the FIR is registered and the police would come into action

and conduct the investigation.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the

judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Yashwant Sinha & Ors. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

& Anr. (2020) 2 SCC 338.

6. It is to inform, at this stage, to the concerned authorities

that role of the petitioner is found to be dubious. No case for

interference is, therefore, made out.

7. The petition is dismissed.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACJ

56-pooja/-

(Uploaded on 21/11/2025 at 11:13:40 AM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)