##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:22626]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1767/2026

Rajesh Jain S/o Shri Genda Lal Jain, Aged About 48 Years, R/o

11-B, Vinayak B Complex, Durga Nursery Road, Udaipur,

Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through PP

2. The Station House Officer, Police Station Kanod, District

Udaipur, Rajasthan.

3. Smt. Geeta Devi W/o Shri Chetan Prakash, R/o Kanod,

Udaipur, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arpit Saxena for

Mr. Tanay Sharma

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, PP

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

12/05/2026

1. The present Criminal Writ Petition has been filed aggrieved of

notice dated 16.04.2026 (Annexure-5) issued in pursuance to

order dated 11.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Petition

No.8356/2024. Further, a relief for declaring the FIR in question

(FIR No.104/2023) to be an abuse of process of law, has also

been made.

2. The facts are that at the initial stage when a FIR was lodged

against the petitioner for offences under Sections 406 & 420 of

IPC, he preferred a Criminal Misc. Petition before this Court for

quashing of the said FIR.

(Uploaded on 13/05/2026 at 03:27:04 PM)

(Downloaded on 21/05/2026 at 02:56:49 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:22626] (2 of 4) [CRLW-1767/2026]

3. Vide order dated 11.12.2024, the said petition stood

disposed of and the Court passed the following order:

“1. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to

press the instant 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 misc. petition as well as stay

petition are 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 20 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 consider the contents of the same and

thereafter, issue necessary instructions to the

Investigating Officer. All the relevant documents with the

representation shall also be taken into consideration. The

representation shall be decided within a period of 40 days

from the date of receipt of the same. Till the

representation is decided, the petitioner shall not be

arrested in connection with FIR No.104/2023 registered at

the Police Station Kanod, District Udaipur.

4. If offence is found proved then instead of affecting

arrest at once, a prior notice of 15 days shall be given to

the petitioner so that he may exercise his statutory right.”

4. As per the petitioner, representation dated 31.12.2024 was

forwarded by him in compliance of order dated 11.12.2024 but the

same was never decided. Despite the same, impugned notice

dated 16.04.2026 has been served on him which is in abuse of

order dated 11.12.2024. It has therefore been prayed that the

said notice be quashed and the proceedings undertaken in

pursuance to the FIR be terminated.

(Uploaded on 13/05/2026 at 03:27:04 PM)

(Downloaded on 21/05/2026 at 02:56:49 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:22626] (3 of 4) [CRLW-1767/2026]

5. Per contra, Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the liberty

granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11.12.2024 has been

misused by him in so far as firstly, he forwarded the

representation by post. Secondly, despite being called upon by the

Investigating Authority vide notice dated 25.03.2025, he did not

appear.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that in order to proceed

further with the investigation, the details of the cheques as

alleged to have been furnished by the petitioner to the Society

qua the debts, were required to be verified. Further, it was

required to be verified by the petitioner as to whether the cheque

amount was credited in the acc