##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 9141/2026 CNR: RJHC010974832026 | URN: CRLMP / 15438U / 2026 Sushil Midha @ Bittu Midha S/o Shri Amar Chand, Aged About 62 Years, Resident Of Sri Vijaynagar, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Tarachand Samriya S/o Shri Tansukh Ram, Resident Of Ward No. 19, Sri Vijaynagar, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Muktesh Maheshwari with Mr. Nishant Gaba and Mr. Mudit Nagpal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG and Mr. B.L. Bhati, AAG with Mr.

Sandeep Soni, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

20/09/2026

1. The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 258/2026 dated 19.09.2026 registered at Police Station Sri Vijaynagar, District Sri Ganganagar, for offences punishable under Sections 223(a), 126(2), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

2. At the outset, it is noted that today is Sunday and a holiday, however, on permission been granted by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, the matter is being heard today.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition has been filed without certified copy of the FIR as there was urgency in the matter and the FIR in question was lodged yesterday i.e. on 19.09.2026. He therefore prays that short accommodation may be granted to place the certified copy of the FIR on record and prays that the matter may be heard on the basis of the photocopy of the FIR placed on record alongwith the petition.

4. Considering the submissions made above, the requirement of submitting certified copy is waived for the time being.

5. Learned GA-cum-AAG raises a preliminary objection and submits that considering the nature of allegations, more particularly under SC/ST Act, the present petition should be heard only after giving opportunity of hearing to respondent No.2 in compliance with Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act.

5.1. He also submits that as a routine measure, interim relief of taking no coercive action or stay on arrest ought not to be granted considering the judgment rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (AIR 2021 SC 1918). Further, the present circumstances do not fulfill the requirement as contemplated in the said judgment, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

6. As far as the objection of the learned AAG that the present petition cannot be heard without serving notice to the respondent No.2 is concerned, this Court is conscious of the fact that in a bail matter so also in any other criminal matter wherein the offences under SC/ST Act are involved, considering the mandatory requirement of Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act, the notices are issued and the matter is heard after making effective service upon the private respondent. Despite the said fact, this Court cannot loose sight of the fact that the present petition has been filed apprehending arrest at the threshold when the elections are scheduled tomorrow i.e. on 21.09.2026. In these extraordinary circumstances coupled with the fact that the matter is not being heard finally, this Court deems it appropriate to hear the present petition on the stay application.

7. This Court has taken note of the judgment referred by learned AAG and has considered the observations made by Hon’ble the Supreme Court. A perusal of the judgment reflects that in case interim relief is granted and reasons for the same ought to be recorded by the Court so as to reflect application of mind by the Court. Keeping into consideration the same, this Court deems it appropriate to hear the parties on the stay application.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the lodging of the present FIR is gross abuse of the process of law. He further submits that the petitioner came to be elec