Dismissed

Vinod Kumar and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Rajasthan HC2 Sept 2026CRLMP/5873/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash an FIR relating to matrimonial offences. The court held that with the Investigating Officer having found the offences proved against two petitioners based on recorded statements, the inherent jurisdiction is not exercised.

What did the court decide?

The petition for quashing the FIR is dismissed.

Vinod Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:35501]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5873/2016 CNR: RJHC020100792016 | URN: CRLMP / 9310U / 2016

¶4

Vinod Kumar S/o Shri Feli Ram, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶5

Pramod Kumar S/o Shri Feli Ram, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶6

Feliram S/o Late Shri Gulla, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶7

Nandram S/o Late Shri Jagannath, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶8

Gyarsi Devi W/o Shri Feliram, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶9

Hansraj S/o Nandaram, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶10

Chhajya @ Aone S/o Shri Nandaram, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶11

Ram Lal S/o Shri Shrawan, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶12

Shyoram S/o Shri Bhonri Lal, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶13

Mamta W/o Shri Chhajya @ Aone, R/o Village Khajulpura, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur, Raj.

¶14

----Petitioners

¶15

Versus

¶16

State Of Rajasthan Through P.P.

¶17

Smt. Kajodi Devi W/o Shri Vinod Kumar, D/o Shri Jansiram, R/o Nalawas, Village Panchayat Jhapda, Police Station Ramgarh Pachwara, District Dausa, Raj.

¶18

Smt. Sanvli Devi W/o Shri Pramod Kumar, D/o Jansiram, R/o Nalawas, Village Panchayat Jhapda, Police Station Ramgarh Pachwara, District Dausa, Raj.

¶19

----Respondents

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.L Meena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Gupta, PP

(2 of 3)

[2026:RJ-JP:35501]

[CRLMP-5873/2016]

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

¶25

Order

¶26

02/09/2026

¶27

The present misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioners under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR No.225/2016 registered at Police Sttion Ramgarh Pachwara, District Dausa.

¶28

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) submits that the marriage of petitioner No.1, Vinod Kumar, was solemnized with complainant/respondent No.2, namely Kajodi Devi, whereas the marriage of petitioner No.2, Pramod, was solemnized with complainant/respondent No.3, namely Sanvli Devi, and both marriages were solemnized in the same household. He further submits that the petitioner(s) never subjected their respective wives to any harassment or cruelty and the allegations levelled against the petitioner(s) are not supported by any cogent evidence. Therefore, the present miscellaneous petition deserves to be allowed.

¶29

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the present petition and submitted that, during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has found the offence to be proved against petitioners No.1 & 2 and apart from the complainant, statements of other witnesses have also been recorded during the course of investigation and, therefore, it cannot be said that the case is devoid of evidence. Therefore, the present miscellaneous petition deserves to be dismissed.

[CRLMP-5873/2016]

[2026:RJ-JP:35501]

(3 of 3)

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶34

Having regard to the fact that, during the course of investigation, statements of the complainant as well as other witnesses have been recorded and the Investigating Officer, upon consideration of the material collected during investigation, has found the offence to be proved against the petitioners No.1 & 2, evidence adduced during investigation, this Court is not inclined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner(s).

¶35

Accordingly, the present miscellaneous petition is dismissed.

¶36

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶37

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J

¶38

70/SAURABH

Vinod Kumar and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases