Criminal Miscellaneous petition where the High Court dismissed a petition challenging an order, relying on a prior decision (Arshad vs State) regarding the necessity of investigation and considerations for maintaining an FIR under specific circumstances.
The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 5039/2017
jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky;] t;iqj ihB t;iqjA
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 5039 / 2017
Tarif S/o Jumma B/c Mev, R/o Village Nawabgarh, Tehsil Tawaru, District Mewat, Haryana.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through PP.
----Respondent
ekuuh; U;k;kf/kifr Jh egsUnz ekgs'ojh
;kph ds vf/koDrk Jh vfuy dqekj tSuA yksd vfHk;kstd Jh ,u ,l 'ks[kkorA
v/khuLFk U;k;ky;] U;kf;d eftLVªsV] fHkokMh ftyk vyoj }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad 12-09-2017] ftlds rgr iqfyl Fkkuk] pkSikudh] ftyk vyoj esa ntZ izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ la[;k &156@2016 vijk/k varxZr /kkjk 379 o 120&ch Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ,oa /kkjk 29] 32] 33] 41&42 ou vf/kfu;e esa tCr'kqnk okgu tslhch la[;k& ,pvkj&74&9508 dks lqiqnZxh ij NksM+us ds dze esa izLrqr izkFkZuk i= [kkfjt fd;k x;k gS] ls O;fFkr gksdj ;kph dh vksj ;g QkStnkjh fofo/k ;kfpdk varxZr /kkjk 482 n.M izfdz;k lfgrk esa izLrqr dh xbZ gSA
2
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 5039/2017
cgl lquh xbZA ;ksX; vf/koDrk ;kph dk dFku jgk gS fd okgu dk mDr izdj.k esa tCr gksuk fookfnr ugha gS] ysfdu izdj.k dk vafre :i ls fuLrkj.k ugha gqvk gSA mudk dFku jgk fd okgu ds iqfyl Fkkus ij [kqys esa [kM+k jgus ls {kfrxzLr gksus ,oa jk"Vªh; lEink dks uqdlku igqapus dh laHkkouk gSA muds vuqlkj ;kph ds fo:) iwoZ esa blh izdkj ds vijk/k dk izdj.k ntZ ugha gqvk gS o u gh iz'uxr okgu iwoZ eas blh izdkj ds vijk/k esa lafyIr jgk gS vkSj u gh Hkfo"; esa ,sls vijk/k dh iqujko`fRr dh tkosxhA vr% QkStnkjh fofo/k ;kfpdk Lohdkj dj okgu dks lqiqnxhZ ij fn, tkus dk fuosnu fd;k x;kA vius rdksZ ds leFkZu esa mudh vksj ls U;kf;d fofu'p; S .B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 840/2017 Arshad Versus State of Rajasthan Through P.P. esa ikfjr fu.kZ; fnukad 22-22017 dh izfr izLrqr dhA
;ksX; yksd vfHk;kstd us mDr rdksZ dk fojks/k fd;kA
leLr rF;ksa ij fopkj fd;k x;kA ;ksX; vf/koDrk ;kph ds dFkuksa dh jks'kuh esa iz'uxr okgu dk lEcfU/kr vijk/k esa tCr gksuk rFkk izdj.k dk vafre :i ls fuLrkj.k ugha gksuk Lohd`r fLFkfr gSA mijksDr rF;ksa ,oa ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, QkStnkjh fofo/k ;kfpdk Lohdkj fd;s tkus ;ksX; gSA
ifj.kker% ;kph dh vksj ls izLrqr ;g QkStnkjh fofo/k ;kfpdk Lohdkj dh tkdj v/khuLFk U;k;ky; dk vkns'k fnukafdr 12-09-2017 vikLr fd;k tkrk gS ,oa ;kph dh vksj ls v/khuLFk U;k;ky; esa okgu lqiqnZxh ds dze esa izLrqr izkFkZuk i= fuEu 'krkZas ds v/khu Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gS %
3
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 5039/2017
¼egsUnz ekgs'ojh½ U;k;kf/kifr
,e 'kekZ&65 mijksDr fu.kZ;@vkns'k Hkkjr ljdkj dk jkti= la[;k&1] fnukad 02 tuojh] 1999 esa izdkf'kr x`g ea=ky;] jktHkk"kk foHkkx ds ladYi@uksfVfQds'ku ds rgr lacaf/kr Hkk"kk ¼fgUnh½ esa [kqys U;k;ky; eas fy[kk;k x;kA
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the need for investigation and consideration of the FIR with respect to the prior complaint makes dismissal necessary.
Whether the petitioner/appellant was informed of right to legal representation in the matter of investigation of the prior complaint.
Whether the High Court should exercise its discretionary power to maintain the FIR in view of the merits of the case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arshad Versus State of Rajasthan Through P.P.Relied on¶15
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 840/2017 Arshad Versus State of Rajasthan Through P.P.
Haryana (Regulation of Entries of the High Court) Act 1999Referred¶24
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Tarif S/o Jumma B/c Mev
State of Rajasthan Through PP
Jh vfuy dqekj tSu
yksd vfHk;kstd Jh ,u ,l 'ks[kkor
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
