Advocates:
['ABHINAV SHARMA', '', 'SWADEEP SINGH HORA', 'N K MEENA']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4936/2019

1.

Ajit @ Gopichand S/o Narayan, R/o Netawali Dhani, Tehsil

Renwal, Ps Renwal, District Jaipur.

2.

Roshan Singh S/o Narayan, R/o Netawali Dhani, Tehsil

Renwal, Ps Renwal, District Jaipur.

3.

Dharti Singh @ Gograj S/o Narayan, R/o Netawali Dhani,

Tehsil Renwal, Ps Renwal, District Jaipur.

4.

Samundar Singh S/o Narayan, R/o Netawali Dhani, Tehsil

Renwal, Ps Renwal, District Jaipur.

5.

Deshraj Yadav S/o Shri Ramphool Yadav, R/o Nenshiya,

Post Lasadiya, Phagi, Jaipur.

6.

Vinod Kumar @ Vikki S/o Shri Lalaram Meena, R/o

Daulatpura, Kotda, Harmada, Jaipur.

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

State of Rajasthan, through PP.

2.

Smt. Arti Meena D/o Damodar Meena, W/o Samundar

Singh, R/o Govindpura, Kalwad Road, Kardhani, Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. S.S. Hora

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Ganesh Saini, PP

Mr. N.K. Meena, through VC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR SHARMA

Order

05/08/2021

1.

This Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for

quashing of charge sheet No.310/2018 arising out of FIR

No.71/2018 registered at Police Station Rainwal, District Jaipur for

offences under Sections 323, 341, 365, 143, 308 and 342 IPC and

Section 3(2)(v)(a), 3(1)(w) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989.

(2 of 5)

[CRLMP-4936/2019]

2.

Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the

material made available on record.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the

police after investigation has submitted charge sheet in the

matter, but the petition under Section 482 CrPC for quashing the

criminal proceedings is maintainable even after filing of challan. All

the allegations levelled against the petitioners are totally false and

fabricated, without conducting investigation in fair and impartial

manner. Cross cases were registered regarding the same incident.

Minor child of the accused-petitioners was kidnapped by the

complainant and her companions. The accused-petitioners in

exercise of their right to private defence had to save the child. No

offence whatsoever is made out against them. The charge sheet

filed against them under Section 299 CrPC deserves to be

dismissed.

4.

Alternatively, learned counsel for the petitioners contended

that on filing of charge sheet, the trial court was obliged to call the

petitioners by issuing summons, but it has straightaway issued

arrest warrants, which should be converted into bailable one. He

placed reliance on Anuj Jermi Vs. State [Manu/TN/1086/2012],

Govind Raghe Khairnar Vs. Khan Wahid Ali Maddan Khan [1988

SCC Online Bom 300], Vineet Kumar Vs. State of U.P. [(2017)13

SCC 369], Prashaant Bharti Vs. State NCT of Delhi [(2013)9 SCC

293], Inder Mohan Goswami Vs. State of Uttaranchal [(2007)12

SCC 1], and Vikas Vs. State of Rajasthan [(2014)3 SCC 321].

(3 of 5)

[CRLMP-4936/2019]

5.

Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that in this

incident the complainant has received as many as 19 injuries. The

version put forth on behalf of the petitioners is false and after

thought. The FIR or criminal proceedings can only be quashed

under Section 482 CrPC when no offence is made out from bare

perusal of contents of the FIR. Whereas, in this case all

ingredients of the crime are mentioned in the FIR. The accused

petitioners did not cooperate in the investigation and absconded,

therefore, the police has filed charge sheet against them under

Section 299 CrPC. The accused-petitioners are habitual offenders.

The petitioners are free to raise all their objections before the trial

court. The petition deserves to be dismissed.

6.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition and

supported the submissions of learned counsel for the complainant.

7.

Heard. Considered.

8.

On bare perusal of the record, it is clear that it is not a case

where