Vinod Kumar Dagra vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:51390)
2025 Latest Caselaw 16123 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Vinod Kumar Dagra vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:51390) on 26 November, 2025

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2025:RJ-JD:51386]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                  S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 8749/2025

Vinod Kumar Dagra S/o Chandanram Jat, Aged About 37 Years,
Resident Of Talai Tali Ki Dhani, Chithawari, Chomu, Jaipur, West,
Jaipur
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Prabhuram Jat S/o Kishanaram, Resident Of Janjila,
         Parvatsar, Didwana, Kuchaman
                                                                      ----Respondents


                  S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 8744/2025

 Vinod Kumar Dagra S/o Chandanram Jat, Aged About 37 Years,
 Resident Of Talai Tali Ki Dhani, Chithawari, Chomu, Jaipur,
 West, Jaipur
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
 1.       State      Of    Rajasthan,         Through        The      Learned    Public
          Prosecutor
 2.       Andaram         S/o      Bhanwaruram,             Resident      Of    Janjila,
          Parvatsar, Didwana, Kuchaman
                                                                      ----Respondents


                  S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 8784/2025

 Vinod Kumar Dagra S/o Chandanram Jat, Aged About 37 Years,
 Resident Of Talai Tali Ki Dhani, Chithawari, Chomu, Jaipur,
 (West) Jaipur
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                         Versus
 1.       State      Of    Rajasthan,         Through        The      Learned    Public
          Prosecutor
 2.       Gumanram Lega S/o Laduram, Resident Of Janjila,
          Parvatsar, Didwana Kuchaman.
                                                                      ----Respondents



                           (Uploaded on 27/11/2025 at 08:28:12 PM)
                          (Downloaded on 27/11/2025 at 09:03:10 PM)
 [2025:RJ-JD:51386]                   (2 of 3)                         [CRLMP-8749/2025]



                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 8762/2025

  Vinod Kumar Dagra S/o Chandanram Jat, Aged About 37
  Years, Resident Of Talai Tali Ki Dhani, Chithawari, Chomu,
  Jaipur, West, Jaipur
                                                                      ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
  1.      State Of Rajasthan, Through The Learned Public
          Prosecutor
  2.      Govind Nath S/o Govardhan Nath, Resident Of Janjila,
          Parvatsar, Didwana, Kuchaman
                                                                 ----Respondents



For Petitioner(s)            :    Mr. Jaideep Singh Saluja
For Respondent(s)            :    Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP.
                                  Mr. Mohammad Akbar



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

26/11/2025 These criminal misc. petitions under Section 528 BNSS have

been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the FIRs No.76/2025,

75/2025, 74/2025 & 73/2025 registered at Police Station

Parvatsar, District Didwana-Kuchaman for the offences under

Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 61(2) of BNS and so also other

proceedings emanating out of the aforesaid FIRs respectively.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at bar. Perused the

material as made available to this Court and gone through the

niceties of the matter.

Having perused the impugned FIR, this Court prima facie

finds that the offences alleged to have been committed by the

(Uploaded on 27/11/2025 at 08:28:12 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:51386] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-8749/2025]

petitioner are either triable by a Court of Magistrate or do not

contain the maximum imprisonment 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 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 15

days shall be given to them so that he may exercise his legitimate

rights. Needless to say that the petitioner is not precluded from

raising their grievance before the trial Court.

With the aforesaid direction, these misc. petitions filed under

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

disposed of.

A copy of this order be placed in each file.

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J 461, 315,317 & 1-suppl.-himanshu/-

(Uploaded on 27/11/2025 at 08:28:12 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)