Smt Sudha Bora vs State & Ors on 19 May, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1192 / 2017
Smt. Sudha Bora S/o Shri Shambhu Dutt Bora,, B/c Brahmin, R/o
Lalji Maharaj Ki Gali, Jalap Mohalla, P.S. Khanda False (East),
Jodhpur (Raj.)

—-Petitioner
Versus

1. State of Rajasthan Through the Commissioner of Police,,
Metropolitan, Commissionerate, Jodhpur (Raj.).

2. Station House Officer,, Police Station Khanda False, Jodhpur
East, Jodhpur.

3. Chand Purohit S/o Shri Kailsah Purohit

4. Kailash Chand Purohit

5. Smt. Anpurna W/o Shri Kailash Purohit,

6. Smt. Komal Purohit W/o Shri Kailash Purohit,, Respondents No.
3 to 6 All Residents of Khanda Falsa, P.S. Khanda Falsa, Jodhpur
East, Jodhpur.

7. The Station House Officer,, Police Station, Chatursringi, Pune
(Maharashtra).

—-Respondents
__
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Sunil Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr.M.S.Panwar PP for the State.
__
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
19/05/2017

1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

has been preferred in the matter of fair and impartial trial in FIR

No.35/2017, Police Station, Khanda False, Jodhpur East, Jodhpur

registered on the complaint sent to said Police Station under

Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. under Sections 323, 325, 377, 406, 120B

and 498A IPC.

(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-1192/2017]

2. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the final report

has been proposed on the ground of territorial jurisdiction.

3. In light of the aforesaid statement made by the learned

Public Prosecutor, this petition is closed. However, this closure of

the criminal case shall not prejudice the right of the petitioner to

get the accused prosecuted in FIR No.151/2017 dated 23.03.2017

READ  Muthu Kutty-vs-State By Inspector Of Police on 7 August, 2003

under Sections 306, 498A and 304B IPC or any other offences,

which the petitioner can prove. The petitioner shall have complete

liberty to raise all his issues at the competent jurisdiction at Pune

(Maharashtra) strictly in accordance with law. The closure report

also shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner whatsoever. The

petitioner shall also have liberty to take copy of this FIR for the

consideration of the competent authority at Pune (Maharashtra)

strictly in accordance with law.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the present misc.

petition is disposed of. The stay application also stands disposed

of.

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI)J.

Skant/-

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *