Dismissed

Sanny Taneja S/O Shri Rajkumar Taneja, v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC10 Nov 2025CRLMP/6724/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directions for fair investigation. Court rejected seeking directions, directing petitioner to file an application under Section 200 Cr.P.C. following Sakiri Vasu to obtain a status report before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner been permitted to file application under Section 200 Cr.P.C. before trial court for status report.

Sanny Taneja S/O Shri Rajkumar Taneja, Vs State… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:44984]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6724/2025

¶4

Sanny Taneja S/o Shri Rajkumar Taneja, Aged About 23 Years, Resident Of 2/350, Jawahar Nagar, Japur City (East), Rajasthan

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶8

The Station House Officer, Police Station Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur City East, Rajasthan.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.Kunal Agarwal
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.Amit Punia,PP

¶11

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶12

Order

¶13

10/11/2025

¶14

The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking directions for fair, proper and impartial investigation in FIR No.146/2025 registered with Police Station Jawahar Nagar (Jaipur City (East)), District Jaipur City (East).

¶15

As per the pleadings of the misc. petition that the FIR was registered against the accused person on 13.05.2025, but the Police is not proceeding in a fair and proper manner, so appropriate directions be issued to the Investigating Officer for conducting a fair and impartial investigation.

¶16

Per contra , learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer and submits that the matter is still at investigation stage and it will take its own time & motion, so directions sought for should not be granted.

[2025:RJ-JP:44984]

[CRLMP-6724/2025]

(2 of 2)

Looking to the fact that the FIR has been registered in the month of May, 2025, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is at liberty to move an application under Section 200 Cr.P.C., in pursuance of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. & Others reported in 2008 (2) SCC 409 , before the Court concerned to get the status report of the investigation.

¶21

In case, any application, as mentioned above, is submitted by the petitioner before the trial court, appropriate orders shall be passed by the court concerned strictly in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶22

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶23

Aayush Sharma /43

Sanny Taneja S/O Shri Rajkumar Taneja, v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanny Taneja S/O Shri Rajkumar Taneja, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Kumar S/O Shri Amar Singh, Vs State of Rajasthan

Satinder P. Singh S/O Late Shri Raunaq Singh Vs Registrar of Companies, Jaipur

Akash Gupta S/O Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Vs the State of Rajasthan

Kailash Chand Jain S/O Shri Phool Chand Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Kamal Singh Son of Ramkhiladi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Hansa D/O Mawasi Vs State of Rajasthan