Dismissed¶39

Dhanraj Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Rajasthan HC10 Feb 2025CRLMP/157/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR refused; Rajasthan HC Jaipur, CRLMP/S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) 157/2015, Dhanraj Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan & Bhagwat Kishore Namdev; FIR No. 239/2014, P.S. Chipabarod, District Baran; offence under Section 363 IPC; State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Supp (1) SCC 335) categories applied; FIR contents prima facie disclose offence; no ground to quash; petition dismissed 10/02/2025; petitioner absent, Naresh Gupta PP for respondents; neutral citation 2025:RJ-JP:5687.

What did the court decide?

On perusal of the contents of the FIR, it cannot be said that no offence is made out if the contents are taken to be correct; i.e., the FIR prima facie discloses an offence. ¶17

Dhanraj Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr. — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:5687]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 157/2015

¶4

Dhanraj Gurjar Son Of Shri Mangi Lal Gurjar, R/o Harnawda Jageer Thana Chhipabarod Baran Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan through P.P.

¶8

Shri Bhagwat Kishore Namdev Son Of Kanhaiya Lal By Caste Namdev, R/o Pasar Mohalla Chhipabarod Baran Raj.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : None Present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naresh Gupta, Public Prosecutor

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶12

Order

¶13

10/02/2025

¶14

No one is present on behalf of the petitioner.

¶15

This criminal misc. petition is pending since 08.01.2015 with a prayer to quash the FIR No.239/2014 registered at Police Station Chipabarod, District Baran for offence under Section 363 of IPC.

¶16

Considered the averments made in the petition and also perused the contents of the FIR.

¶17

On perusal of the contents of the FIR, it cannot be said that no offence is made out if the contents are taken to be correct.

¶18

Law is well settled with regard to quashing of FIR in the case

¶19

of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal [1992 Supp (1) Supreme

¶20

Court Cases 335] , wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed

¶21

as under:-

¶22

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series

(2 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:5687]

[CRLMP-157/2015]

of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 48 482 of the Code which 482 we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

¶27

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

¶28

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

¶29

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or com-plaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

¶30

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

¶31

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

¶32

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(3 of 3)

[2025:RJ-JP:5687]

[CRLMP-157/2015]

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.

¶37

103. We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice.”

¶38

Taking into consideration the averments made in the petition so also the contents of the FIR, this Court finds no ground to quash the FIR.

¶39

Accordingly, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed.

¶40

Stay application and pending application/s, if any, stand

¶41

disposed of.

¶42

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶43

Satyendra/23

Dhanraj Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanraj Gurjar v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mangal Chand Saini S/O Shri Bhanwar Lal Saini Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kernel Singh Urf Kali S/O Balwant Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Krishna Das Agrawal Son of Shri Ranchod Das Agrawal Vs Income Tax Department

Jaiveer S/O Rohitash Vs State of Rajasthan

Ankit S/O Sumer Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Farook S/O Bhanwaru Khan Moyal, Vs Pyarelal S/O Nemichand