Petition under Section 482 CrPC alleging improper investigation. Court directed petitioner to file representation within 10 days and directed the Superintendent of Police to ensure fair and expeditious investigation within one month upon receipt of representation.
Direction to file representation within 10 days and ensure fair investigation within 1 month.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JD:18948]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1836/2024
----Petitioners
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.R. Saharan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS
Order
01/05/2024
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. 218/2023, P.S. Sangriya, District Hanumangarh, for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
[2024:RJ-JD:18948]
[CRLMP-1836/2024]
(2 of 3)
965 ], Narayan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [ 2013(1) Cr.L.R. 264 ] and Azija Begum Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. [ 2012(1) RLW 835 ], has held that a fair and proper investigation is fundamental rule of law; it is necessary to meet the ends of justice.
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-1836/2024]
[2024:RJ-JD:18948]
accordance with law under the supervision of a superior officer within a period of one month.
(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J
167-Dinesh/C10/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the investigating officer is conducting a fair and proper investigation into the FIR?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Manoj Kumaria Shankaria Vs. State of RajasthanRelied on¶24
Manoj Kumaria Shankaria Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [2014(3) Raj.CriC 965]
Narayan Singh Vs. State of RajasthanRelied on¶24
Narayan Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [2013(1) Cr.L.R. 264]
Azija Begum Vs. State of MaharashtraRelied on¶24
Azija Begum Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. [2012(1) RLW 835]
Shyam Singh Vs. State of RajasthanRelied on¶25
Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [2015(3) Cr.L.R. 1375]
Gopal Nath Vs. State of RajasthanRelied on¶25
Gopal Nath Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [2015(4) Cr.L.R. 1617]
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of BiharRelied on¶25
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Anr. [(2014) 8 SCC 273] · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Gulam Rasul S/o Khuda Baksh
Anaja Bibi W/o Mohammed Rasid
Khurseda W/o Ramjan
Hajara W/o Savan
State Of Rajasthan
The Director General Of Police, Jaipur
Madan Gopal Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
