Allowed

Shivraj and Ors. v. State

Rajasthan HC7 Dec 2023CRLMP/970/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Rajasthan, Jodhpur allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed proceedings initiated through a de novo investigation without court permission following an accepted negative final report. The court held that fresh investigation requires prior court sanction after a prior charge sheet stating no case is made has been accepted.

What did the court decide?

The present petition is allowed and all proceedings and further investigation in pursuance of and in continuation of FIR No.277/2002 are quashed and set aside.

Shivraj and Ors. Vs State — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

(1 of 2) [CRLMP-970/2017]

¶2

[2023:RJ-JD:42712]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 970/2017

¶5

Shivraj Chhangani S/o Shri Gwaldas Chhangani, aged about 79 years,

¶6

Prem Ratan Bohra S/o Ramratan Bohra,

¶7

Kishan Lal Ranga S/o Ramdev Ranga., All By Caste Brahmin, Resident Of Natthusar Gate, Bikaner.

¶8

----Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State Of Rajasthan

¶11

----Respondent

¶12

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Vineet Jain Sr. Adv. assisted by
	Mr. Pravin Vyas
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Abhishek Purohit,AGA

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI Order

¶14

07/12/2023

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the material as made available to this Court.

¶16

Bereft of elaborate details succinctly stating the facts of the case are that an FIR got lodged for committing offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B of IPC and after a thorough investigation, a negative final report came to be submitted before the Court of competent jurisdiction. The learned magistrate after going through the averments made in the negative final report and the material collected during investigation had concurred with the conclusion reached by the Investigating Officer and thus,

[2023:RJ-JD:42712]

[CRLMP-970/2017]

(2 of 2)

the negative final report was accepted and the file was consigned to record in the year 2004.

¶21

For the reasons not known, the matter got rejuvenated at the hands of a new police officer and whereafter without getting any prior permission from the Court, a de novo investigation has been commenced and in continuance thereof the petitioners were summoned to appear before the police officer since the offence was proved against them.

¶22

I am of this considered view that once a negative final report is accepted by the Court then in that circumstance before commencing a fresh investigation, further investigation or de novo investigation, a permission would be required from the Court who accepted the earlier negative final report.

¶23

Having not doing so, the officer has exercised the powers beyond his limitation and against the settled principal of law. In this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the present petition deserves to be allowed and all proceedings and further investigation in pursuance of and in continuation of FIR No.277/2002 of Police Station Naya Shahar, District Bikaner are hereby quashed and set aside. The instant criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed in these terms. Stay petition is disposed of.

¶24

(FARJAND ALI),J

¶25

163-Samvedana/-

Shivraj and Ors. v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivraj and Ors. v. State

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

Anil Bhargava Vs State of Rajasthan

Sandesh Kumar Vs Subodh Kumar

State Vs Muzib Rahman

Rajesh Tanwar Vs State of Rajasthan

Hemant Vs State of Rajasthan

Ayub Khan Vs State of Rajasthan