Disposed¶19

Sanjay Godara S/O Ramchandra Jat, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Dec 2025CRLMP/3533/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR refused/disposal; Section 528 BNSS powers; FIR No. 68/2024 P.S. Fathepur Sadar Sikar; Sections 143, 341, 323, 307, 506 IPC; alleged false implication; counterblast to FIR No. 90/2017; old enmity; election quarrel at polling booth; representation to Investigating Officer; cognizable offence to be investigated; CRLMP-3533/2024; Rajasthan HC Jaipur; Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand; petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of; petitioners left free to submit representation with documents before the Investigating Officer; stay application and all pending applications also stand disposed of. ¶19

Sanjay Godara S/O Ramchandra Jat, Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court, exercising its power under Section 528 BNSS, should interfere to quash FIR No. 68/2024 registered with Police Station Fathepur Sadar, Sikar. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

The correctness and genuineness of the allegations levelled in the FIR cannot be adjudged by this Court while exercising its power contained under Section 528 of BNSS; that task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Whether the petitioners were falsely implicated on account of FIR No. 90/2017 or on account of old enmity involves disputed facts which are required to be investigated by the Investigating Agency.

¶19

Key takeaways

The petitioners are at liberty to submit a representation along-with relevant documents in support of their contentions before the Investigating Officer, who shall consider the same strictly in accordance with law.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Rajasthan (Jaipur Bench) [Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand], 10/12/2025: disposed of S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3533/2024 seeking quashing of FIR No. 68/2024 (P.S. Fatehpur Sadar, Sikar) for offences under Sections 143, 341, 323, 307 and 506 IPC. Held that the correctness/genuineness of FIR allegations cannot be adjudicated while exercising power under Section 528 BNSS, and the disputed questions - false implication allegedly in counterblast to FIR No. 90/2017, implication out of old enmity, and a polling-booth quarrel during elections - are matters for investigation by the Investigating Agency. Petitioners granted liberty to submit a representation with relevant documents before the Investigating Officer, to be considered strictly in accordance with law. Stay application and pending applications disposed of.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3533/2024

¶3

Sanjay Godara S/o Ramchandra Jat, R/o Tajsar, Fatehpur Sadar, Sikar, Rajasthan.

¶4

Ajay S/o Sitaram, R/o Tajsar, Fatehpur Sadar, Sikar, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

¶8

Rajendra S/o Birbal, R/o R/o Tajsar, Fatehpur Sadar, Sikar, Rajasthan.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: None
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Amit Punia-PP

¶11

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶12

Order

¶13

10/12/2025

¶14

By way of filing this criminal misc. petition, a prayer has been made for quashing the impugned FIR No. 68/2024 registered with Police Station Fathepur Sadar, Sikar for the offence under Sections 143, 341, 323, 307 and 506 of IPC.

¶15

As per the grounds taken in this petition, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case because of his old enmity with the complainant. It has also been stated that FIR No. 90/2017 was registered against the complainant party by the petitioners and in counterblast to the aforesaid, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the impugned FIR. It has also stated in the petition that on account of elections some quarrel

¶16

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-3533/2024]

¶17

took place between the parties during voting at the polling booth, Hence, interference of this Court is warranted.

¶18

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the contents of the petition and submits that the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR reveal the commission of a cognizable offence and the same is required to be investigated by the Investigating Agency. Hence, interference of this Court is not warranted.

¶19

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Whether the petitioners have been falsely implicated on account of the FIR No. 90/2017 registered against the complainant or not, or whether the petitioners have been implicated as an accused on account of old enmity. These disputed facts are required to be investigated by the Investigating Agency. 6. The correctness and genuineness of the allegations levelled in the FIR, cannot be adjudged by this Court while exercising its power contained under Section 528 of BNSS. Certainly, this task has been assigned to the Investigating Officer. 7. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to submit a representation along-with relevant documents in support of their contentions before the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer shall consider the same strictly in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, the criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶20

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶21

Ashu/5

Sanjay Godara S/O Ramchandra Jat, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Godara S/O Ramchandra Jat, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin S/O Late Shri Rambabu Vs State of Rajasthan

Kapil Jakhar S/O Sh. Birju Singh, Vs the State of Rajasthan

Charan Singh Singaria S/O Shri Om Prakash Singaria Vs State of Rajasthan

Gunjan Mittal W/O Vishal Pandey D/O Sunil Mittal Vs State of Rajasthan

Zafar Chisti Son of Syed Farooq Ahmed Niyaji, Vs the State of Rajasthan

Rukmani Devi W/O Balu Ram Meena, Vs State of Rajasthan