Disposed

Harish Kumar Parrmar v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC8 Feb 2024CRLMP/724/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition alleging improper investigation of FIR No.73/2023 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC. Court relied on precedent on fair investigation, noted the Public Prosecutor's assurance, and disposed of the petition directing the SP and Investigating Officer to consider the petitioner's representation and ensure a fair investigation.

What the court decided

AI extract

Harish Kumar Parrmar Vs State of Rajasthan — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:6629]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 724/2024

¶4

Harish Kumar Parmar S/o Shri Deva Ram Ji, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Nehru Colony, Ward No. 4, Sanchore, Dist. Jalore (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶8

The Inspector General of Police, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶9

The Superintendent of Police, Jalore (Raj.)

¶10

The Station House Officer, Police Station Sanchore, Jalore (Raj.).

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dilip Choudhary Mr. Hardik Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar,PP

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶14

Order

¶15

08/02/2024

¶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 as well as the concerned Superintendent of Police is not conducting proper investigation in relation to FIR No.73/2023, P.S. Sanchore, District Jalore, for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Hon’ble the Supreme Court, in the cases of Manoj Kumaria Shankaria 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 &

[2024:RJ-JD:6629]

[CRLMP-724/2024]

(2 of 2)

Anr. [ 2012(1) RLW 835 ], has held that a fair and proper 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 Arnesh 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 concerned as well as Investigation Officer 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 concerned as well as Investigation Officer to consider petitioner’s representation (if filed) and ensure fair investigation, in accordance with law.

¶24

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶25

451-Dinesh/-

Harish Kumar Parrmar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Harish Kumar Parrmar v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pandir @ Pankaj Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Lalchand Vs State of Rajasthan

Jaikam Vs State of Rajasthan

Sunil Vishnoi Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Gurpindra Kaur Vs State

Rahul Khatik Vs State of Rajasthan