Dismissed

Rama Ram v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC3 Jul 2024CRLMP/4031/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction for fair investigation into his sister’s death by torture. Court held he must exhaust remedies under Section 36 and 156(3) Cr.P.C. before approaching High Court. Petition dismissed with liberty.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of dismissing the plea with liberty to approach appropriate forum.

Rama Ram Vs State of Rajasthan — Dowry and Cruelty | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:26747]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4031/2024

¶4

Rama Ram S/o Sh. Sona Ram, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Kundal, P.s. Siwana, Dist. Balotra.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

Superintedent Of Police, Balotra.

¶9

The Sho, Police Station Balotra, Dist. Balotra.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Girdhar Singh Bhati
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Gaurav Singh,PP

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶13

Order

¶14

03/07/2024

¶15

Aggrieved against the inaction by police officials, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to conduct a fair investigation in the 0140/2024 dated 08.04.2024, registered at P.S. Balotra for the offences under Sections 302 and 498-A IPC for the offences under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC.

¶16

As per FIR, on 30.04.2024, petitioner’s sister Tila, who got married about 15-16 years ago, was allegedly tortured by her husband and her in-laws for dowry. Her father also gave her a land at Balotra, but the husband did not stop torturing her. On 07.04.2024, at about 12.00 in the night, he got a telephone call from one Paras Ji, who called him at Balotra. When he and his family members reached Balotra Hospital, they were told that his sister was beaten and she had succumbed to her injuries so received. Petitioner avers that after registration of FIR, the

(2 of 3)

[2024:RJ-JD:26747]

[CRLMP-4031/2024]

investigating agency is not properly investigating the matter even though enough material has been supplied. The investigating agency is trying to file charge-sheet for the offences under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC instead of Section 302 IPC. Hence, the petition herein.

¶21

Heard.

¶22

Learned State Counsel appears on service of advance copy of petition. He opposes the petition arguing that matter is at investigation stage and law ill take its own course.

¶23

In my opinion, the petitioner ought to have availed other available legal remedies for redressal of his grievance, before directly approaching this Court. Ordinarily, in case of a grievance arising out of unfair or improper investigation of an FIR, the aggrieved person can seek recourse to remedy of approaching police officer superior in rank as per Section 36 Cr.P.C. Even thereafter, if grievance is yet unmitigated, one can then take recourse by approaching a Magistrate of competent jurisdiction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., who can order investigation and submission of report by police. Not only that, an aggrieved party can choose to file a criminal complaint before a competent Court, if so advised. Reference may be had to Apex Court judgment in Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. and others [(2008) 2 SCC 409] .

¶24