Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Ankit Vyas vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:37486) on 21 August, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:37486]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3459/2025
Ankit Vyas S/o Mahesh Vyas, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Durga
Colony Marimata Chauraya Mata Mandir K Pass Indore Madhya
Pradesh
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Rajkumar S/o Shri Bharmal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
702 Akme Paradisemeera Nagar Sukher District Udaipur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Lalas
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narnedra Singh Chandawat, PP
Mr. Arun Kumar
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
21/08/2025
1. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the
petitioners does not want to press the instant criminal misc.
petition. However, he seeks liberty for the petitioners 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 is disposed of
as not pressed with liberty to the petitioners 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 07 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
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
(Downloaded on 21/08/2025 at 09:46:59 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:37486] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3459/2025]
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. The parties will be at liberty to
approach this Court again, if grievance arises.
4. Till 30 days from the date of filing of representation, the
petitioners shall not be arrested in connection with FIR
No.133/2023, registered at the Police Station Cyber Police Station
(Udaiopur), District Udaipur.
5. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Section
420, 406, 120-B of the IPC and Section 63D of the IT Act. 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 petitioners is absolutely necessary,
then instead of affecting arrest at once, a prior notice of 15 days
shall be given to the petitioners. Further the petitioners shall also
be at liberty to raise all permissible objections and issues before the
trial court at the appropriate stage of proceedings
6. Stay petition also stands disposed of.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
19-Hanuman/-
(Downloaded on 21/08/2025 at 09:46:59 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)