Disposed

Govind Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC20 Aug 2024CRLMP/5473/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court refused to quash the FIR summarily on the grounds that falsity of allegations is a matter of investigation. However, directed the Investigating Officer to follow Arnesh Kumar guidelines and respect a 30-day notice requirement for arrest under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to join investigation; no coercive action against him subject to investigation cooperation; 30-day notice required for arrest under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.

Govind Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:34195]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5473/2024

¶4

Govind Singh S/o Shri Gulabsingh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Lohariya Bada, P.s. Khusalgarh, Dist. Banswara,raj.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

¶8

Dharmendra Rot S/o Shri Krishanlal Rot, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Dugela Talab, Chorasi, Dist. Dungarpur,raj.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Raghuveer Singh.
For Respondent(s)	: Ms. Sonu Manawat,P.P.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶12

Order

¶13

20/08/2024

¶14

Petitioner is before this Court seeking quashing of an FIR No.197/2024, dated 08.07.2024, registered under Sections 3 and 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, at Police Station Kushalgarh, District Banwara.

¶15

Heard.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners would urge that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the FIR in question. The petitioner is fearful that he may be arrested on the basis of false allegations leveled against him.

¶17

Whether or not the allegations are false is a matter of investigation, and it is not for this Court at this preliminary stage to adjudicate on the same.

¶18

In the premise, it would not be appropriate to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction vested under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and

[2024:RJ-JD:34195]

[CRLMP-5473/2024]

(2 of 2)

quash the FIR summarily on the basis of self serving affidavit of petitioner/accused. It is expected of the Investigating Agency to proceed further in accordance with the law.

¶23

However, I am of the view, apprehension of the petitioner, qua arrest, seems to be fair. In the premise, it is expected of the Investigating Officer to strictly follow the guidelines rendered by Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr¹ .

¶24

Petitioner is directed to join the investigation, and subject to that, no coercive action shall be taken against him. However, if during the investigation, the Investigating Officer finds that the petitioners are not cooperating or there is any incriminating material sufficient enough to warrant their custodial interrogation, then a 30 days prior notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. (now Section 35 of BNSS) shall be given to him so as to enable them to seek legal remedy in accordance with the law.

¶25

The instant petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶27

(ARUN MONGA),J

¶28

89-Sumit/-

¶29

1 (2014) 8 SCC 273

Govind Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Leeladhar Vs Naru Bai

Kinder Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Khuma Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Paramjeet Kaur Vs State of Rajasthan

Bharat Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Khemraj Kumawat Vs State of Rajasthan