Disposed

Murti Devi v. State

Rajasthan HC10 Nov 2021CRLMP/439/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court directed the Superintendent of Police to consider the petitioner's representation and relevant documents within ten days and conduct a fair investigation in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh to consider the representation with relevant documents if submitted within ten days and conduct fair investigation.

Murti Devi Vs State — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 439/2021

¶4

Murti Devi W/o Sh. Pradeep Kumar Jat, Aged About 27 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Ward No. 40, Sureshiya, Hanumangarh Junction, Dist. Hanumangarh.

¶5

Pradeep Kumar Jat S/o Jaswant Singh, Aged About 44 Years, B/c Jat, R/o Ward No. 40, Sureshiya, Hanumangarh Junction, Dist. Hanumangarh.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State, Through Pp

¶9

Superintendent Of Police, Hanumangarh.

¶10

The Inspector General Of Police, Bikaner Range, Bikaner.

¶11

S.h.o., Police Station Hanumangarh Junction, Dist. Hanumangarh.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Bidan Halu For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Bhati, PP

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR Order

¶15

10/11/2021

¶16

The petitioner has preferred this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking fair investigation in FIR No.0349/2019 registered at Police Station Hanumangarh Junction, District Hanumangarh for the offences under Sections 370, 452, 323 and 143 of IPC.

¶17

In Manoj Kumaria Shankaria Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2014(3) Raj.CriC 965, Narayan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2013(1) Cri.L.R.264 and Aziza Begum Vs.

¶18

State of Maharashtra & Anr., 2012(1) RLW 835 , wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that a fair and proper investigation is

¶19

(2 of 2)

¶20

[CRLMP-439/2021]

¶21

always conducive to the ends of justice and for establishing rule of law.

¶22

In Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2015(3) Cri.L.R. 1375 and Gopal Nath Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., 2015(4) Cri.L.R. 1617, relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar V/s State of Bihar & Anr., reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, also the petitioner therein was permitted to submit a representation before the investigating officer and the investigating officer was directed to consider the documents before forming any opinion.

¶23

Learned Public Prosecutor assures this Court that fair and transparent investigation shall be made, and in case the petitioner submits a representation alongwith all the relevant documents before the Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh within a period of ten days from today, then the same shall be considered at the time of investigation.

¶24

In light of the aforesaid precedent law as well as the assurance given by the learned Public Prosecutor, the present misc. petition is disposed of with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh to consider the representation alongwith all the relevant documents, if submitted by the petitioner within a period of ten days from today, and conduct fair investigation, strictly in accordance with law.

¶25

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶26

78-payal/-

Murti Devi v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murti Devi v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhash Vs Rajni Lodha

Teeja Kanwar Vs State

Sanjay Tak Vs Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Smt Munni Devi Deora Vs State

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Um Singh Vs State of Rajasthan