Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Goverdhan Das vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:34374) on 5 August, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:34374]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6979/2024
Goverdhan Das S/o Sh. Kalu Das Kamad, Aged About 39 Years,
R/o Medta, Dabok, Dist. Udaipur, Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Gopal Krishan Kumawat S/o Sh. Kanhaiya Lal, R/o
Chakradhar Shikshan Sansthan, Dabok, Udaipur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Kumar.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh, PP.
Mr. Rishabh Tayal for complainant.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
05/08/2025
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press the
instant criminal misc. petition. However, he seeks liberty for the
petitioner to submit a representation to the concerned
Superintendent of Police with appropriate directions to decide the
same and issue necessary instructions to the concerned
Investigating Officer.
2. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition as well as stay
petition are dismissed as not pressed with liberty to the petitioner
to submit a detailed representation to the concerned
Superintendent of Police averring therein all the grounds which
have been raised in this petition within a period of 10 days from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(Downloaded on 07/08/2025 at 06:03:43 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:34374] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-6979/2024]
3. In the event, the representation is submitted, the concerned
Superintendent of Police is directed to minutely and objectively
consider the contents of the same and thereafter, issue necessary
instructions to the Investigating Officer. All the relevant
documents with the representation shall also be taken into
consideration. The representation shall be decided within a period
of 30 days from the date of receipt of the same. Till the
representation is decided, the petitioner shall not be arrested in
connection with FIR No.122/2024 registered at the Police Station
Dabok, District Udaipur.
4. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections
408, 419, 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC. Thus, the provisions
contained under Section 35 of BNSS (Sections 41 and 41A of the
CrPC) are applicable mutatis mutandis and the judgment rendered
by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State
of Bihar [AIR 2014 SC 2756] applies squarely in the present
case, therefore, it is deemed appropriate to direct the
investigating officer that in the event, the offences are found to be
proved and the arrest of the petitioner is absolutely necessary,
then instead of affecting arrest at once, a prior notice of 15 days
shall be given to the petitioner. Further the petitioner shall be at
liberty to raise all permissible objections and issues before the trial
court at the appropriate stage of proceedings
5. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
1-/Jitender//-
(Downloaded on 07/08/2025 at 06:03:43 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)