Rajasthan High Court – Jaipur
Ahsan Ulla @ Mohammad Munavvar S/O … vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jp:25479) on 10 July, 2025
Author: Sameer Jain
Bench: Sameer Jain
[2025:RJ-JP:25479]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3713/2025
Ahsan Ulla @ Mohammad Munavvar S/o Mohammad
Rahmatullah, Aged About 44 Years, House No. 5-3-464, Near
Topkhana Masjid, Ghosa Mahal, Naampali, Hayderabad.
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan through the PP
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Fahad Hasan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP
Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Judgment
10/07/2025
1. The present petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023
for quashing the proceedings in Session Case No.249/202 (CIS
No.3249/2022) pending in the Court of Additional District &
Session Judge No.4, Ajmer for the offence under Sections 143,
506, 504, 188, 117, 302/115 read with Section 149 IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on
account of certain bona fide reasons the petitioner was not able to
mark personal presence in the concerned Court on various
occasions, resultant to which non-bailable warrants were issued
against the petitioner. It is further submitted that during the said
tenure, qua the main accused and the co-accused, proceedings
were initiated, wherein they were exonerated, however, the
petitioner was not exonerated due to non-participation. In this
(Downloaded on 16/07/2025 at 10:01:33 PM)
[2025:RJ-JP:25479] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3713/2025]
regard, learned counsel has submitted that on account of said fact
entire proceedings ought to be quashed.
3. Upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court
finds no reason to interfere with the present petition for the
reason that impugned order rejecting the application filed under
Section 70(2) Cr.P.C., is justified on account of non appearance of
the petitioner; that order dated 16.07.2024 (Annexure-4) is
justified and well-speaking order, whereby co-accused and main
accused were exonerated, howsoever, no order was passed qua
petitioner on account of non-participation; that the petitioner has
approached this Court without availing alternative remedy. It is
settled position of law that a writ petition should not be
entertained when an effective alternate remedy is provided by
law.
4. Taking note of the aforementioned, this Court deems it
apposite to dismiss the present petition with liberty to the
petitioner to avail alternate and efficacious remedy available, in
accordance with the law.
5. In view of the above, present petition is dismissed. Pending
applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
JKP/85
(Downloaded on 16/07/2025 at 10:01:33 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)