Disposed

Padmaram Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Mar 2022CRLMP/327/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 CrPC alleging improper investigation in connection with FIR No.0547/2021. Court directed Superintendent of Police (Rural), Jodhpur to consider petitioner's representation and ensure fair investigation in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Superintendent of Police (Rural), Jodhpur to consider petitioner's representation (if filed) and ensure fair investigation.

Padmaram Jat Vs State of Rajasthan — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 327/2022

¶4

Padmaram Jat S/o Sukharam Jat, Aged About 31 Years, Murkasani, Bilara, Borunda, Jodhpur Gramin, Rajasthan 342602.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary Of Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan.

¶8

Superintendent Of Police Rural, Jodhpur.

¶9

S.h.o., P.s. Bilara, Dist. Jodhpur.

¶10

Executive Officer Of Nagar Palika Bilara, Bilara, Rajasthan 342602.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Patel with Mr. Vinod Prajapat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Sharma, P. P.

¶13

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA

¶14

Order

¶15

04/03/2022

¶16

By way of the present petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has alleged that the Investigating Officer is not conducting proper investigation in relation to FIR No.0547/2021, P.S. Bilara, Disrict Jodhpur, for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 394 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

Hon’ble the Supreme Court, in the cases of Manoj Kumaria S hankaria Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [ 2014(3) Raj. CriC 965 ], Narayan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [ 2013(1) Cr.L.R. 264 ] and Azia Begum Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. [ 2012(1) RLW 835 ], has held that a fair and proper

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[CRLMP-327/2022]

¶20

investigation is fundamental to rule of law; it is necessary to meet the ends of justice.

¶21

In the cases of Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [ 2015(3) Cr.L.R. 1375 ] and Gopal Nath Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [2015(4) Cr.L.R. 1617], while relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Aresh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Anr. [ (2014) 8 SCC 273 ] , the petitioner therein was asked to submit a representation before the investigating officer with a corresponding direction to the investigating officer to consider representation and documents so submitted, before forming any opinion.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor assures this Court that fair and transparent investigation shall be made and in case the petitioner submits a representation along with all the relevant documents before the Superintendent of Police (Rural), Jodhpur within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered at the time of investigation.

¶23

Hence, the present misc. petition is disposed of with direction to the Superintendent of Police (Rural), Jodhpur to consider petitioner’s representation (if filed) and ensure fair investigation, in accordance with law.

¶24

The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶25

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶26

58-A.Arora/-

Padmaram Jat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padmaram Jat 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saraswati Vs State

Hardeep Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Peena Kumari Vs State of Rajasthan

Raghvendra Singh Gaur Vs State of Rajasthan

Chanderkala Vs State of Rajasthan

G.K. Construction Company Vs Balaji Makan Samagri Stores