Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Rakesh Jain S/o Late Shri Mohanlal Sethiya – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The Hon’ble Apex Court while deciding the Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 2943/2025 has passed an order on 03.03.2025 directing this Court to take up the matter and decide the instant criminal misc. petition expeditiously.
2. Pursuant to the aforesaid order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the matter was posted at the top of the list and with the consent of counsel for the parties, arguments have been heard and the instant misc. petition is decided by this Court.
3. By way of filing the instant criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for quashing the FIR No. 324/2024 registered with Police Station Ashok Nagar, Jaipur City (South) for the offences under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC .
4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that a suit for partition was filed by the complainant-respondent-plaintiff against the instant petitioner-defendant before the Court of Additional District Judge No. 6, Kota registered as Case No. 212/2018 and titled as Rajkumar Sethia Vs. Mohan Lal Jain and Ors. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was one of the defendants in the aforesaid suit. Since the proceedings of the suit were going on at a snail’s pace
Legal representatives must ensure accuracy in court filings; misconduct with signatures undermines judicial trust.
The need for prima facie evidence and the expediency in the interests of justice before initiating proceedings under Section 340 CrPC.
Cooperation with criminal investigations under Section 91 Cr.P.C. does not necessitate prior arrest and the issuance of notices for signature samples is valid, preserving investigative authority.
The court affirmed that specimen signatures can be obtained for investigation purposes without arresting the accused, ensuring compliance with procedural rights.
The court affirmed that a charge-sheet can only be quashed if there is no prima facie case against the accused, emphasizing the need for sufficient evidence to proceed.
Repeated filing of similar petitions on the same cause of action, which have already been dismissed, constitutes an abuse of the court process and may result in costs being imposed on the petitioner.
Court reaffirmed that adequate notice must be given to informants, and judicial directions for investigation should respect the discretion of the police, ensuring procedural fairness.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
