Dismissed¶26

Balkishan Sharma S/O Shri Ram Lal Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC5 May 2026CRLMP/3174/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR refused under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; FIR No.130/2015, PS Dooni, District Tonk; offences under Sections 167, 467, 465 and 120-B IPC; accused-petitioner alleged to have submitted bail bonds with forged signatures while acting as Investigating Officer in FIR No.185/2015; FSL report confirmed signatures of complainant party forged; petition dismissed; stay and pending applications disposed.

What did the court decide?

Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances, the allegation against the accused-petitioner, and the FSL report that the signatures of the complainant party were found to be forged on the bail bonds submitted by him, the Court held that it is not a fit case to quash the FIR. ¶25

Balkishan Sharma S/O Shri Ram Lal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan — Rajasthan HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:19035]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3174/2019

¶4

Balkishan Sharma S/o Shri Ram Lal Sharma, R/o Bada Takhta, Raghunathpuri, PS Kotwali Tonk, District Tonk.

¶5

----Accused-Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan, through PP.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Smt. Kamod W/o Late Shri Chandmal, R/o Polyada, PS Dooni, District Tonk.

¶10

----Complainant/Respondent

¶11

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. R.S. Bhardwaj
For Respondent(s)	:	Mr. Amit Kumar Punia, Public Prosecutor
		Mr. Avinash Dhanju for Mr. Praveen
		Kumar Jain for complainant
		Shri Hemraj, RPS, C.O., Deoli Tonk
		present in person

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

¶13

Order

¶14

05/05/2026

¶15

This criminal misc. petition has been filed by the accusedpetitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.130/2015 registered at Police Station Dooni, District Tonk for the offences punishable under Sections 167, 467, 465 and 120-B IPC.

¶16

Heard.

¶17

Considered the submissions made by counsel for the accused-petitioner as well as Public Prosecutor assisted by counsel for the complainant.

[2026:RJ-JP:19035]

[CRLMP-3174/2019]

(2 of 3)

The Court has also gone through the case diary placed before this Court by the Investigating Officer, namely, Hemraj, RPS, C.O., Deoli, District Tonk.

¶22

As per the contents of the FIR, the allegation against the accused-petitioner is that he being the Investigating Officer in an FIR No.185/2015 has submitted bail bonds of certain persons including the complainant with the forged signatures before the concerned Magistrate, which is said to have prejudiced the interest of the complainant party.

¶23

Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that there was no criminal intention of the accused-petitioner in submitting the bail bonds of the complainant party. He further submits that when the accused-petitioner went to the place of residence of the complainant party, certain persons have signed the bail bonds showing themselves to be the persons of the complainant party in the present case whereas, they were accused in the FIR No.185/2015.

¶24

Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submits that during investigation and after having the FSL as regards the signatures on the bail bonds, it has been found that the signatures of the complainant party were forged one.

¶25

Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances and the allegation against the accused-petitioner and so also the FSL report that the signatures of the complainant party were found to be forged on the bail bonds submitted by the accused-petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to quash the present FIR.

¶26