HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4220/2018
1. Rajendra Kumar S/o Kheta Ram, Aged About 30 Years,
2. Kheta Ram S/o Nenu Ram, Aged About 55 Years,
3. Seema D/o Kheta Ram, Aged About 33 Years,
4. Phooli Devi W/o Kheta Ram, Aged About 52 Years,
All B/c Jat, R/o Shastri Nagar Barmer, P.S. Kotwali,
1. State of Rajasthan Through PP.
2. Smt. Manu Choudhari W/o Rajendra D/o Mala Ram, B/c
Jat, R/o Shastri Nagar Barmer.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.MK Dudi.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.VS Rajpurohit, PP.
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
1. The petitioners have preferred this criminal misc.
petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR
No.48/2018 registered at Police Station Mahila, Barmer for the
offence under Sections 498A, 323, 342 406 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant/
respondent no.2 is wife of the petitioner no.1. The parties are in
litigation and proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and under
Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act are going on. Another F.I.R.
No.429/2018 is also under investigation at P.S. Kotwali, Barmer
registered at the instance of the petitioner no.1.
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-4220/2018]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners may be permitted to move a representation along with
all relevant documents before the I.O. bringing all the facts to his
4. Learned Public Prosecutor assures this Court that if the
petitioners submit a representation alongwith all the necessary
documents before the concerned investigating authority within a
period of fifteen days from today, then the same shall be
considered and decided strictly in accordance with law, before
completing the investigation.
5. In light of the aforesaid assurance given by learned
Public Prosecutor, the present misc. petition is disposed of with a
direction to the concerned investigating authority that in case the
petitioners submit a representation along with all the necessary
documents before it within a period of ten days from today, then
the same shall be considered and decided before completing the
investigation, strictly in accordance with law and as per the
assurance given by the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. In the peculiar facts of the case, it would be
appropriate to grant protection from arrest to the petitioners as it
will be a waste of energy and resources of the Police Department
to run after the accused to complete the related investigation and
without protection it would also cause unnecessary hardship to the
accused, who deserves a basic opportunity of explaining their case
before the Investigating Authority without fear of arrest. The
Investigating Officer, however, shall have the liberty of custodial
interrogation after giving 15 days’ notice before arrest if required.
In the interest of justice and the facts and circumstances noted by
this Court, the limited protection is justified. Therefore, if during
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-4220/2018]
the investigation, the concerned investigating authority needs to
arrest the petitioners, then the petitioners shall be given 15 days’
notice before making such arrest. The petitioners shall be required
to join the investigation. The petitioners shall be at liberty to
approach this Court again, in case need arises.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)