Petition challenging cognizance taken on a protest petition under Sections 420 and 406 IPC, and rejection of revision. The High Court held that at the stage of taking cognizance only a prima facie case is to be seen; the accused's defence is for trial, and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6507/2025
Kuldeep Rajan S/o Shri Jainarayan, Aged About 48 Years, Resident Of Village Khorabisal, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj). At Present Resident Of Rajan Villa, Plot No. 59, Arun Vihar Niwaru Road, Near Puliya, Jhotwara, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Vaishnavi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP
JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
17/11/2025
[CRLMP-6507/2025]
(2 of 3)
(3 of 3)
[CRLMP-6507/2025]
correctness and genuineness of the allegations cannot be adjudicated by this Court at the stage of taking cognizance.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J
KuD/53
2 issues framed by the court
Whether interference was warranted against the order taking cognizance under Sections 406 and 420 IPC on the complainant's protest petition despite a negative final report.
Whether the defence of the accused can be appreciated at the stage of taking cognizance.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Kuldeep Rajan
State of Rajasthan
Ramavtar Sharma
Anoop Kumar Dhand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
