Dismissed

Krishanram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC27 Sept 2021CRLMP/4801/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur dismissed a special criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashment of an FIR. The court held that as the investigation was ongoing and names of petitioners appeared in the FIR, no ground was made out to interfere under Section 482 CrPC, leading to dismissal of both the quashing and stay petitions.

What did the court decide?

The miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 110/2021 and the stay petition were dismissed.

Krishanram Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4801/2021

¶4

Krishanram S/o Shri Ramuram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Sarothiya, Tehsil Sujangarh, District Churu.

¶5

Sitadas Swami S/o Shri Meghas Swami, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Manpura, Bidasar, District Churu.

¶6

----Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Pappu Sangwa.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Mool Singh Bhati.
	Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI

¶12

Judgment / Order

¶13

27/09/2021

¶14

Petitioners have preferred this miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 110/2021 dated 06.08.2021 registered at Police Station- Bidasar, District- Churu.

¶15

It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that six persons were arrested by the Police and from them a firearm was recovered. Petitioners have nothing to do with the crime, still the Police is investigating against the petitioners.

¶16

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the misc. petition. It is contended that in the FIR, names of the petitioners are appearing. At the time when the co-accused were arrested, they stated that they have been hired by the present petitioners for threatening Om Prakash.

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLMP-4801/2021]

¶19

I have perused the FIR and considered the contentions. At this stage, the police has the right to investigate, the names of the petitioners are appearing in the FIR and the persons who have hired the co-accused have been arrested by the Police.

¶20

No ground is made out for interfering with the investigation and it is not a fit case where the proceedings can be quashed under the provisions of Section 482 CrPC.

¶21

This misc. petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶22

Accordingly, the stay petition is also dismissed.

¶23

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶24

15-jayesh/-

Krishanram v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishanram v. State of Rajasthan

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

Mtm Employees Co-Operative Thrift and C.S Vs the O.L. M/S Mewar Textiles and Anr.

Mtm Employees Staff Consumer Co-Operati Vs the O.L. M/S Mewar Textiles and Anr.

Sunil Kamra Vs State

Rajesh S/O Shri Laxman Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohan Yadav S/O Pooran Mal Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Aruna Devi W/O Shri Rajendra Prasad Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan