Mangat Ram Khanna vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:672)
2026 Latest Caselaw 164 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mangat Ram Khanna vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:672) on 7 January, 2026

[2026:RJ-JD:672]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6110/2025

Mangat Ram Khanna S/o Shri Gajanand, Aged About 60 Years,
Resident Of Ward No. - 10, Dhanak Mohalla, Sri Ganganagar.
                                                                         ----Petitioner
                                        Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
         Of Personnel, Jaipur.
2.       The Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Rajasthan, Nehru
         Sahakar Bhawan, 22 Godam, Jaipur.
3.       The       Additional       Superintendent            Of      Police-Ii,     Anti
         Corruption Bureau, Pali.
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)             :    Mr. Ankur Mathur
For Respondent(s)             :    Mr. Arpit Samariya



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

07/01/2026

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

prosecution sanction against the petitioner was granted on

29.09.2023 and the said order has been challenged by way of the

present writ petition. It is contended that the impugned order is a

non-speaking order and has been passed in a wholly mechanical

manner, reflecting total non-application of mind. Learned counsel

for the petitioner places reliance upon the judgment passed by the

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.

1023/2025 decided on 20.02.2025. Further reliance is placed on

the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil

Special Appeal No. 707/2023 decided on 18.10.2024 and it is

submitted that the impugned order deserves to be set aside and

(Uploaded on 08/01/2026 at 07:03:56 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:672] (2 of 2) [CW-6110/2025]

the matter be remanded to the competent authority for fresh

consideration after due application of mind.

2. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the

submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, however,

he is not in a position to refute the submissions made by learned

counsel for the petitioner. As a matter of fact, learned counsel for

the respondent fairly concedes that the impugned order may be

set aside and liberty be granted to the respondent authorities to

pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

3. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for

both the parties, the impugned order dated 29.09.2023

(Annexure-4) is hereby set aside. The respondent authorities are

granted liberty to take a fresh decision as to whether prosecution

sanction is to be granted or not, in accordance with law and after

due application of mind.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

5. All pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.

(SUNIL BENIWAL),J 71-Ashutosh/-

(Uploaded on 08/01/2026 at 07:03:56 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)