Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Dhanni vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:35010) on 7 August, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:35010]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2924/2025
1. Dhanni D/o Mangal Singh, Aged About 80 Years, R/o
Mohra, Pratapgarh, Raas, Dist. Beawar, Raj.
2. Kamla D/o Mangla, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Mohra,
Pratapgarh, Raas, Dist. Beawar, Raj.
3. Fully D/o Mangla, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Mohra,
Pratapgarh, Raas, Dist. Beawar, Raj.
4. Pappu Singh S/o Kishna, Aged About 58 Years, R/o
Sodpura, Raas, Dist. Beawar, Raj.
5. Shivraj S/o Pappu Singh, Aged About 29 Years, R/o
Sodpura, Raas, Dist. Beawar, Raj.
6. Gumani D/o Pappu Singh, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
Sodpura, Raas, Dist. Beawar, Raj.
7. Nisha D/o Pappu Singh, Aged About 18 Years, R/o
Sodpura, Raas, Dist. Beawar, Raj.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Nathu Singh S/o Laxman Singh, R/o Mohra, Pratapgarh,
Raas, Dist. Beawar, Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Sharma
Mr. Dilip Kumar Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh, PP
Mr. Awar Dan Ujjwal for complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
07/08/2025
1. 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
(Downloaded on 07/08/2025 at 09:49:37 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35010] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-2924/2025]
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 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
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 the representation is decided, the petitioners shall not be
arrested in connection with FIR No.38/2025 registered at the
Police Station Raas, District Beawar.
5. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under
Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of 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 petitioners is
(Downloaded on 07/08/2025 at 09:49:37 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35010] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-2924/2025]
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 be at liberty to raise all permissible objections
and issues before the trial court at the appropriate stage of
proceedings
6. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
15-mSingh/-
(Downloaded on 07/08/2025 at 09:49:37 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)