Dismissed

Praveen Shelley v. State and Anr.

Rajasthan HC7 Aug 2018CRLMP/518/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed petitions seeking directions for investigation into a civil dispute found by police to lack criminal elements, noting the investigation concluded and alternative remedies exist. No order was deemed necessary as the petitions for directions were moot.

What did the court decide?

No order passed in the criminal miscellaneous petitions; petitioner free to move Magistrate for further investigation or file protest against negative report.

Praveen Shelley Vs State and Anr. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1568/2018

¶4

Smt. Manju Agrawal W/o Shri Sushil Agrawal , R/o B-1, Near P And T Circle, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur.

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 518/2018
1. Praveen Shelley S/o Shri S.A.
Inayat , By Caste Ishai, R/o 37-
Central School Scheme,
Airforce Area, Jodhpur
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan
2. Sushil Agrawal S/o Prem
Kishore Agarwal , 46-48, 3Rd A
Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur.
Rajasthan
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr Mahesh Bora, Sr. Advocate
assisted by Mr Nishant Bora (In
S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition no.1568/2018)
Mr Moti Singh (In S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition
No.518/2018)
For Respondent(s) : Mr M.S.Panwar – PP
Mr Vinod Sharma for complainant (In
S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.518/2018)

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI

Judgment / Order

07/08/2018

(2 of 4)

[CRLMP-1568/2018]

S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.1568/2018 is preferred on behalf of petitioner – Smt. Manju Agarwal with a prayer for issuing directions to the investigating agency to conduct fair, impartial and speedy investigation into the allegations levelled in FIR No.140/2015 of Police Station, Rohat, District Pali, whereas for quashing of the same FIR, S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.518/2018 is preferred on behalf of petitioner Praveen Shelley.

¶15

This Court vide order dated 29.05.2018, after taking into consideration the factual report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, issued a direction to him to apprise this Court about the stage of the investigation in relation to the above referred FIR by the next date of hearing, case diary of which was sent to the Additional Director General, CID (CB), Jaipur. On 06.07.2018, the learned Public Prosecutor informed this Court that the Additional Director General, CID (CB), Jaipur has returned the case diary with a direction to the Investigating Officer to conduct investigation on some points. On that day, it was informed that the SHO, Police Station, Rohat, District Pali, who is the Investigating officer, would conduct further investigation on the points suggested by the Additional Director General, CID (CB), Jaipur by 20.07.2018. The matter was then fixed for 20.07.2018.

¶16

On 20.07.2018 again some time was sought by the learned Public Prosecutor to enable the Investigating Officer to conclude the investigation, and the matter was fixed for today.

¶17

Today, the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted a factual report, wherein the Investigating Officer has concluded that the allegations levelled in the above referred FIR against accused-persons are not proved and the police have found that the dispute between the parties is purely of civil nature.

¶18

(3 of 4)

¶19

[CRLMP-1568/2018]

¶20

Learned counsel Mr Mahesh Bora, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr Nishant Bora appearing on behalf of petitioner-Smt. Manju Agarwal in S.B.Cr.Misc.Petition No.1568/2018 has argued that as a matter of fact the police have not conducted fair and impartial investigation into the allegations levelled in the above referred FIR.

¶21

It is also argued that as many as 7 Officers have already investigated into the allegations levelled in the above referred FIR and concluded that a case of commission of cognizable offence is made out against accused-persons Praveen Shelly, Ashok Pitti and Mahendra Jalani, however, now the subsequent Investigating Officer has illegally concluded that no offence is made out against the said persons and the dispute between the parties is purely of civil nature.

¶22

Learned counsels for the petitioners has, therefore, prayed that a direction be issued to the Investigating Agency to conduct fair and impartial investigation into the allegations levelled in the above referred FIR.

¶23

Having heard learned counsels for the petitioners and having gone through the factual report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, this Court is of the opinion that if the petitioner Smt. Manju Agarwal is not satisfied with the conclusion arrived at by the Investigating Officer, it is always open for her to either move an application before the concerned Magistrate with a prayer for directing the Investigating Agency to conduct further investigation or to move a protest petition in case negative final report is submitted by the police before the concerned Magistrate.

¶24

In view of the fact that the Investigating Agency has completed the investigation and proposed to file negative final

¶25

(4 of 4)

¶26

[CRLMP-1568/2018]

¶27

report in connection with FIR No.140/2015 of Police Station, Rohat, District Pali, no order is required to be passed in both these criminal misc. petitions.

¶28

Accordingly, both the criminal misc. petitions are dismissed. However, Smt. Manju Agarwal, petitioner in S.B.Cr.Misc. Petition No.1568/2018 is free to either move an application before the concerned Magistrate with a prayer for directing the Investigating Agency to conduct further investigation or to move a protest petition in case negative final report is submitted by the police before the concerned Magistrate.

¶29

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶30

m.asif/PS

Praveen Shelley v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen Shelley v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritu Garg Vs State

Mohd Jakir Vs the State of Rajasthan

Dhanna Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Abdul Rahim Vs State

Baiju Lal Vs State and Anr.

Ashok Kumar Sharma and Anr. Vs State and Anr.