Honble RATHORE, J.–By way of this writ petition the petitioner prayed for a writ of mandamus for quashment of FIR No. 21/2006 dated 27.01.2006 registered at Police Station Transport Nagar, Jaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 469, 471, 120-B, IPC, and Section 65 of Information Technology Act 2000.

(2). During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has deleted the offence under Section 65 of the I.T. Act, 2000 from the purview of investigation and has proceeded to undertake further investigation only in regard to the offences under Sections 465, 469, 471, 120-B, IPC.

(3). In the First Information Report, it has been alleged that some news items were published in the Newspaper which were containing aspersions against Cabinet Minister in Government of Rajasthan Shri Rajendra Singh Rathore, founded on some statement of one Ved Prakash Saini. In the report it has also been stated that on the basis of the newspaper reporting an enquiry was launched by the I.G.P. (Special and Economic Offences), C.I.D., Jaipur.

(4). The reporting in newspaper related to allegations on Cabinet Minister Shri Rajendra Singh Rathore pertaining to his involvement in an incident about prostitution by one Vanita wife of Ved Prakash Saini.

(5). During the course of enquiry launched by the I.G.P. (Special and Economic Offences), C.I.D., Jaipur, statements of victim Vanita, petitioner Bhim Sen Garg, Police Officers Arun Macha and Pyara Sin.h etc. were recorded.

(6). Vanita, in her statement recorded during the course of enquiry stated that she was in custody at Police Station Shyam Nagar, Jaipur on 10.06.2005 in connection with FIR No. 168/2005, she had reported a News Reporter that she had never gone with any Minister or his P.A.

(7). On the conclusion of the enquiry it was found that Vanita had been sent for prostitution by her husband on 10.06.2005 to some other three persons. As such, Mahaka Bharat had published scandalous news on the basis of which the Ministers name was being dragged in the controversy.

(8). In the aforesaid backdrop, on the basis of inquiry report, an FIR No. 217/2005 was registered under Section 5 and 6 of PITA Act at Police Station Jamwa Ramgarh, Jaipur. The investigation of the same was given to the Additional Superintendent of Police and it was found that no Minister or his P.A. was found to be involved in the incident.

(9). During the course of investigation of FIR No. 21712005 a notice was given to the petitioner-Editor of Mahaka Bharat for providing the original C.D. on the basis of which newspaper reporting, was done. In response to the notice, it is alleged that petitioner showed inability in providing the original C.D. However, a copy of C.D. was provided to the Additional Superintendent of Police by one employee of Mahaka Bharat, namely; Shri K-M Sharma-Accounts Officer. And on receipt of copy of C.D. it was sent to FSL Jaipur examination and a report was also given. In the report it was found that C.D. was found interpolated and it was also alleged that in the original interview by Electronic Media as also in the statement recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C., before Magistrate, Vanita had categorically stated that she had not gone with any Minister, but Bhim Sen Garg had removed the said portions from the C.D. and by way of interpolation, committed forgery and on the basis of the interpolated C.D., a scandalous news item was published in Mahaka Bharat with an object to stigmatize the image of a particular Minister in State Government.

(10). For the offence committed by the petitioner FIR No. 21/2006 was registered at Police Station, Transport Nagar on 27.01.2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 471 and 120- B IPC, and Section 65 of Information and Technology Act, 2000 and later on during investigation, the offence under Section 65 of the I.T. Act, 2000 has been deleted from the purview of investigation.

(11). The FIR No. 21/06 registered at P.S. Transport Nagar is challenged by the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document