Surendra vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:2382)
2026 Latest Caselaw 575 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Surendra vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:2382) on 15 January, 2026

[2026:RJ-JD:2382]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                    S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 305/2026

Surendra S/o Jagdish, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Ward
No. 7, Bhuna, Tehsil And District Fatehabad, Harayana.
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
2.       Kamal Kishore S/o Ramratan, Resident Of Ward No. 21,
         Mangala Colony, Churu, Police Station Sadar, District
         Churu, Rajasthan.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Aman Bishnoi Bhola
For Respondent(s)            :     Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP



      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Order

15/01/2026

1. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner

does not want to press the instant criminal misc. petition. However,

he seeks liberty for the petitioner to submit a representation to the

concerned Superintendent of Police with appropriate directions to

decide the same and issue necessary instructions to the concerned

Investigating Officer.

2. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition is disposed of

as not pressed with liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed

representation to the concerned Superintendent of Police averring

therein all the grounds which have been raised in this petition within

a period of 07 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

3. In the event, the representation is submitted, the concerned

Superintendent of Police is directed to minutely and objectively

(Uploaded on 16/01/2026 at 10:13:00 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:2382] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-305/2026]

consider the contents of the same and thereafter, issue necessary

instructions to the Investigating Officer within 30 days thereof. All

the relevant documents with the representation shall also be taken

into consideration. The parties will be at liberty to approach this

Court again, if grievance arises.

4. The offences alleged against the petitioner is under Sections

420 and 406 of IPC. Thus, the provisions contained under Section

35 of BNSS (Sections 41 and 41A of the CrPC) are applicable

mutatis mutandis and the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar [AIR 2014

SC 2756] applies squarely in the present case, therefore, it is

deemed appropriate to direct the investigating officer that in the

event, the offences are found to be proved and the arrest of the

petitioner is absolutely necessary, then instead of affecting arrest at

once, a prior notice of 15 days shall be given to the petitioner. The

petitioner shall be at liberty take up all the issued at appropriate

stage and file a fresh application with regard to the matter in

question.

5. Stay petition also stands disposed of.

(BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J 16-deep/-

(Uploaded on 16/01/2026 at 10:13:00 AM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)