HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B.Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 533 / 2017 Vijendra Singh Barhath ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan And Anr ----Respondent _____________________________________________________

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Upman For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Shekhawat, PP Mr. Prafulla Kumar, Addl. Commissioner, Jaipur is present in person _____________________________________________________

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

Order

25/01/2017 This petition has been filed under Section 482 CrPC with the following prayer:

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your Lordships may graciously be pleased to accept this criminal misc. petition and further be pleased to call for the entire record relating to the case from the investigating officer and same may kindly be examined; and i) That the FIR No. 57/2013 at Police Station, Banipark, District Jaipur may kindly be quashed and set-aside.

ii) Any other appropriate relief may also be granted to the petitioner.”

Brief facts of the case are that on 7.3.2013, an FIR was lodged by the respondent no. 2 (Manoj Kumar Gupta), The Then Circle Inspector, Police Station, Sadar, Jaipur (West) Raj. against the petitioner and others. The instant petition has been filed for quashing the aforesaid FIR.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that during the period of lawyer’s agitation, false allegations were levelled in the aforesaid FIR while nothing had happened. It appeared from the record of the CCTV cameras that absolutely false case was registered by the complainant – respondent, while petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence. He was in the Court campus as the petitioner and others, whose names have been mentioned in the FIR, are practicing Advocates of Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur as well as Sessions Court.

Learned counsel has further pointed out that from the reading of FIR, which has been lodged against the accused petitioner, as well as from the evidence collected by the respondent no.2, it does not disclose the commission of any offence by the petitioner. He has further contended that for the purpose of investigation, permission is required under Section 155(2) CrPC. He has further contended that from the facts, circumstances and documents annexed with the petition, it is apparent that the FIR has been lodged with ulterior motive, malafide intention and due to personal grudge. He has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana Versus Chaudhary Bhajanlal, wherein certain guidelines have been issued for quashing the FIR, and requested that in this view of the matter, the impugned FIR No. 57/2013 lodged in this matter, may be quashed and set-aside.

Issue notice to respondent no.2, returnable within four weeks. In the meanwhile, the investigation of FIR No. 57/2013 registered at Police Station, Banipark, District Jaipur shall remain stayed.

(Mahesh Chandra Sharma), J.

DK/134 Powerd by TCPDF (w.tcpdf.org)