SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sagar Joshi & Ors vs State & Anr on 4 May, 2018

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 322 / 2018

1. Sagar Joshi Son of Shri Banwari Lal Joshi, Serving As Electrical
Engineer, Allahabad, Resident of B.K Kaul Nagar, Krishna Vihar
Colony, Ajmer. (Husband)

2. Smt. Shanta Wife of Shri Banwari Lal Joshi, Residing At B.K
Kaul Nagar, Krishna Vihar Colony, Ajmer. (Mother-in-law)

3. Banwari Lal Son of Shri Ram Shankar, Residing At B.K Kaul
Nagar, Krishna Vihar Colony, Ajmer. (Father-in-law)

4. Smt. Sapna Sultaniya Wife Shri Deepak Sultaniya, Residing At
Bhilwara. Since 2012 (Nanad/sister-in-law)

5. Deepak Sultaniya Son of Satyanaryan, Residing At Bhilwara.

6. Smt. Santosh Wife of Shri Kishan Gopal, Residing At Beawar.
Since 1984 (Married Bua)

7. Ram Babu Son of Shri Amarchand Ji, Residing At Vishali Nagar,
Ajmer. (Mediator/Family Friend)


1. State of Rajasthan

2. Smt. Raveena, Daughter of Shri Surendra Kumar Sharma, Aged
About 25 Years, Resident of 196/3 Ram Nagar, Pali.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Kumbhat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Rawal, PP
Mr. Vineet Jain
Judgment / Order

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

been filed by the petitioners with a prayer for quashing of FIR

No.43/2018 of Police Station Mahila Thana, Pali for the offences

punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 354 IPC read with

under Sections 4 and 5 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

(2 of 2)

Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted a factual report

wherein, it is mentioned that after thorough investigation the

police have not found involvement of the petitioner Nos. 2 to 7 in

commission of any crime and therefore they have proposed to file

negative final report in respect of them.

It is further stated by learned Public Prosecutor that in

respect of the petitioner No.1 – Sagar Joshi, the police have found

prima facie case against him for offences punishable under

Sections 498A, 406 and 323 IPC.

At this stage learned counsel for the petitioners has

submitted that he does not want to press this criminal misc.

petition on behalf of the petitioners, however, seeks liberty for

petitioner No.1 to move appropriate representation before the

Investigating Officer. It is also prayed that the Investigating

Officer be directed to consider the representation filed on behalf of

the petitioner No.1 objectively.

Hence, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed as not

pressed with the liberty as prayed for.

Stay petition also stands dismissed.

It is expected that if any such representation is filed on

behalf of the petitioner No.1, the same shall be considered

objectively by the Investigating Officer.

Factual report be taken on record.



Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation