Disposed

Narendra Talreja v. State

Rajasthan HC18 Jan 2021CRLMP/3138/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a miscellaneous criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner challenged an FIR alleging cheating and forgery. The court did not quash the FIR but granted the petitioner 15 days' notice before arrest to submit a representation to the investigating authority.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted 15 days' notice before arrest to submit representation for consideration before investigation completion.

Narendra Talreja Vs State — Cheating and Forgery | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3138/2020

¶3

Narendra Talreja S/o Shri Khemchand Talreja, Aged About 51 Years, By Caste Talreja, R/o 486, Hiranmagri, Sector Number 4, District Udaipur (Raj.).

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State, Through P.p.

¶7

Shri Dinesh Mehta S/o Shri Shavchand Mehta, Bimasar Rapad, Kachcha / Bhuj, Gujrat.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms.	Deepika Soni
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Gaurav Singh,PP

¶10

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶11

Order

¶12

18/01/2021

¶13

In wake of onslaught of COVID-19, abundant caution is being taken while hearing the matters in Court.

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this misc. petition under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. for quashing of FIR No.286/2020 lodged at P.S. Hiran Magri, District Udaipur for the offence under Sections 420, 406, 120-B IPC.

¶15

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant has made allegation of forged signatures upon the present petitioner even when the signatures in-question are upon registered document.

¶16

(2 of 3)

¶17

[CRLMP-3138/2020]

¶18

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to submit a representation alongwith all the relevant documents before the concerned investigating authority to redress the issue.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor assures this Court that if the petitioner submits a representation alongwith all the necessary documents before the concerned investigating authority within a period of ten days from today, then the same shall be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law, before completing the investigation.

¶20

In light of the aforesaid assurance given by learned Public Prosecutor, the present misc. petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned investigating authority that in case the petitioner submits a representation alongwith all the necessary documents before it within a period of ten days from today, then the same shall be considered and decided before completing the investigation, strictly in accordance with law and as per the assurance given by the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶21

In the peculiar facts of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection from arrest to the petitioner as it will be a waste of energy and resources of the Police Department to run after the accused to complete the related investigation and without protection it would also cause un-necessary hardship to the accused, who deserves a basic opportunity of explaining his case before the Investigating Authority without fear of arrest. The Investigating Officer, however, shall have the liberty of custodial interrogation after giving 15 days’ notice before arrest if required. In the interest of justice and the facts and circumstances noted by this Court, the limited protection is justified. Therefore, if during

¶22

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-3138/2020]

¶23

the investigation, the concerned investigating authority needs to arrest the petitioner, then the petitioner shall be given 15 days’ notice before making such arrest. The petitioner shall be required to join the investigation. The petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court again, in case need arises.

¶24

The status report furnished by learned PP be taken on record.

¶25

(PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J 138-Sanjay/-

Narendra Talreja v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra Talreja v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahesh Kumar Vs Amit Ojha

Moda Ram Vs State

Jasveer Singh @ Soni Vs State of Rajasthan

Amrit Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Tara Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Indra Raj Vs State of Rajasthan