[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ajay Tak vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:8815) on 10 February, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:8815]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 673/2025
Ajay Tak S/o Jawaharlal Tak, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Ranawas,
P.s. Siriyari, Tehsil Marwar Junction District Pali. Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Pramod Singh S/o Bhojawas, R/o P.s. Siriyari, Tehsil
Marwar Junction, District Pali, Raj.
3. Kuldip Singh, R/o Sichana, P.s. Siriyari, Tehsil Marwar
Junction ,district Pali, Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Jaya Bhati
Mr. Rajendra Singh
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shriram Choudhary, AGa
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
10/02/2026
1. The present revision petition under Sections 397 and 401
Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 07.02.2025
passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of
Atrocities) Cases, Pali in Criminal Case No.167/2024, whereby the
learned Court accepted the final report dated 13.11.2024
submitted by the police.
2. The revision petition is reported to be delayed by 15 days.
An application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed
seeking condonation of delay. For the reasons stated therein, the
application is allowed. The delay of 15 days in filing the revision
(Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 05:23:16 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:8815] (2 of 3) [CRLR-673/2025]
petition is condoned. The revision petition is thus treated within
limitation and heard on merits.
3. It appears that the petitioner is the complainant in a criminal
case wherein, after investigation, a negative final report came to
be submitted by the Investigating Officer. The petitioner appeared
before the learned Magistrate and sought time to file a protest
petition. However, on the next date, upon his non-appearance, the
learned Court proceeded to accept the final report.
4. Having considered the record, this Court is of the view that
even if none appeared on behalf of the complainant to file a
protest petition against the closure report submitted by the police,
the learned trial Court was nonetheless under an obligation to
independently examine the material collected during investigation
and to record its satisfaction with regard to the conclusions drawn
by the Investigating Officer. The Court is not expected to act
merely upon the opinion of the Investigating Officer. Acceptance of
a negative final report, without adverting to the grounds and
material forming the basis of the investigation and without
recording reasons indicating application of judicial mind, cannot be
said to be a just and reasoned order.
5. In view of the above, the revision petition deserves to be
allowed.
6. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated
07.02.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Pali in Criminal Case
No.167/2024 is set aside. The learned trial Court is directed to re-
(Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 05:23:16 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:8815] (3 of 3) [CRLR-673/2025]
register the case and within one month from the date of receipt of
a certified copy of this order, the petitioner shall file a protest
petition before the learned trial Court. Upon filing of the protest
petition, the petitioner shall be heard. If he seeks to produce
evidence in support of his protest petition, appropriate opportunity
shall be afforded to him. Thereafter, the learned trial Court shall
proceed to conduct the enquiry and pass orders in accordance
with law as contemplated under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. The stay petition also stands disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
86-Pramod/-
(Uploaded on 19/02/2026 at 05:23:16 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
