Disposed

Surendar Singh Meel v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC9 Mar 2017CRLMP/6620/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of two misc. petitions filed for the same FIR. It directed the Investigating Officer to conduct the investigation fairly, impartially, and expeditiously, considering representations made by both parties.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Investigating Officer to conduct the investigation fairly, impartially, and expeditiously, considering representations by both parties.

Surendar Singh Meel Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors. — Rajasthan HC (2017) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5773 / 2016

¶3

Rambabu Kasana Son of Shri Ram Narayan Ji Kasana, by Caste Gurjar, R/o Plot No. 3-A, Sumer Nagar Extension, Mansarovar, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶6

Surendra Singh Meel Son of Shri Gangadhar Meel, by Caste Jat, aged about 37 years, R/o Plot No. A-131, Hanuman Nagar, Sirsi Road, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶7

----Complainant/Respondent Connected with

¶8

S. B. CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS (PETITION) No. 6620 / 2016

¶9

Surendar Singh Meel Son of Shri Gangal Meel, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Plot No.131, Hanuman Nagar, Sirsi Road, Jaipur, District Jaipur (Rajasthan).

¶10

Versus

¶11

State of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶12

The Commissioner of Police, Jaipur, Commissionerate, Jaipur.

¶13

Station House Officer, Police Station, Sadhar, Jaipur City (south), Jaipur.

¶14

–--- Respondents

¶15

Rambabu Kasana Son of Shri Ramnaran Jee Kasana, R/o 03. A, Sumar Nagar Vistar, Mansawar, Jaipur.

¶16

(2 of 4)

¶17

CRLMP-5773/2016]

¶18

Gorav Agarwal Son of Shri Unnone,, R/o Kamala Naharu Nagar, Ajmer Road, Jaipur.

¶19

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Goverdhan Singh and Mr. Ravindra Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Biri Singh Sinsinwar Sr. with Mr. Surendra Meel Public Prosecutor : Mr. Jitendra Shrimali Investigating Officer : Ms. Shilpa Choudhary, Additional DCP Traffic North and Mr. Narendra Puri, Additional DCP.

¶20

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BANWARI LAL SHARMA

¶21

Order

¶22

09/03/2017

¶23

Petitioner- accused Rambabu Kasana preferred this misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5773 / 2016 for quashing impugned FIR No. 405/2014 dated 10.10.2014 registered at Police Station Sadar, Jaipur City (South) Jaipur (Annexure-1) and investigation done in pursuant to it.

¶24

Similarly respondent- complainant Surendar Singh Meel also preferred S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6620/2016 for fair and impartial investigation in the aforesaid FIR.

¶25

Since both the petitions have been filed for one and the same FIR, therefore, both are being decided by the common order.

¶26

(3 of 4)

¶27

[CRLMP-5773/2016]

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Goverdhan Singh submits that date of incident in FIR is shown as 08.09.2014 and the FIR was registered on 10.10.2014, no plausible reason is given for such inordinate delay. He submits that the place of incident in FIR is shown as residence of petitioner and petitioneraccused himself lodged FIR No. 400/2014 against the complainant on 09.10.2014 for offences under Sections 452, 323 and 143 of IPC registered at Police Station Sadar, Jaipur (South) and FIR No. 652/2014 registered at Police Station Mansarovar, Jaipur (East) for offences under Sections 143, 458, 323, 427 and 504 of IPC. He submits that after lodging the aforesaid two FIRs by petitioner, respondent – complainant lodged false FIR through Court against the present petitioner and his witnesses as a counterblast. In this regard several representations were made by the petitioner to the Investigating Officer, Director General of Police and Home Minister etc. even after lapse of more than two years, no cognizance is taken on the aforesaid representations.

¶29

Investigating Officer Ms. Shilpa Choudhary, Additional DCP, Traffic North also admits this fact through learned Public Prosecutor that representations of petitioner- accused have been received by her which are lying with the file.

¶30

Mr. Biri Singh Sinsinwar learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent- complainant in S. B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5768/2016 submits that complainant has also made representations, they may also be directed to be considered during investigation.

¶31

(4 of 4)

¶32

CRLMP-5773/2016]

¶33

Learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Jitendra Shrimali submits that investigation is being conducted fairly and impartially and the representations made by either party will be considered during investigation.

¶34

In view of above, these misc. petitions are disposed off with direction to Investigating Officer that investigation of the case be conducted fairly, impartially and expeditiously after considering the facts mentioned in the representations made by the petitioneraccused and complainant and documents submitted with the respective representations and submit the result of investigation expeditiously before the competent Court.

¶35

(BANWARI LAL SHARMA)J.

¶36

S. Kumawat/153-154

Surendar Singh Meel v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendar Singh Meel v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devendra Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Gaurav Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Abdul Sagir Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rambabu Kasana Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

M/S K-7 Empex Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Krishan Kumar Vs Mr Kudia Ram and Ors.