Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Hansaram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:35872) on 12 August, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:35872]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4435/2025
1. Hansaram S/o Chunnaram, Aged About 65 Years,
Khundawas, Tehsil Rohal District Pali
2. Motiram S/o Savaram, Aged About 65 Years, Khundawas,
Tehsil Rohal District Pali
3. Hajari Ram S/o Prabhuram, Aged About 70 Years,
Muliyawas Tehsil And District Pali
4. Khimaram S/o Hemaram, Aged About 70 Years, Chatelao
Tehsil Rohal District Pali
5. Pukharam S/o Lalaram, Aged About 72 Years, Chatelao
Tehsil Rohal District Pali
6. Keraram S/o Khimaram, Aged About 75 Years, Baldo Ki
Dhani Tehsil And District Pali
7. Venaram S/o Vasaram, Aged About 65 Years, Baldo Ki
Dhani Tehsil And District Pali
8. Narsinghram @ Narsingh S/o Dallaram, Aged About 75
Years, Kerala Tehsil And District Pali
9. Keraram S/o Pukharam (Adopted Son Of Tulsaram), Aged
About 52 Years, Kerala Tehsil And District Pali
10. Savaram S/o Bheraram, Aged About 60 Years, Kerala
Tehsil And District Pali
11. Girdharilal S/o Modaram, Aged About 51 Years, Javdiya
Tehsil And District Pali
12. Sukhharam S/o Rooparam, Aged About 62 Years, Javdiya
Tehsil And District Pali
13. Chogaram S/o Pemaram, Aged About 75 Years, Javdiya
Tehsil And District Pali
14. Narsinghram S/o Kesaram, Aged About 62 Years, Javdiya
Tehsil And District Pali
15. Mohanlal S/o Adaram, Aged About 73 Years, Roopawas
Tehsil And District Pali
16. Sonaram S/o Venaram, Aged About 60 Years, Muliyawas
Tehsil And District Pali
17. Sonaram S/o Hansaram @ Jeevaram, Aged About 48
Years, Khundawas Tehsil Rohat And District Pali
----Petitioners
(Downloaded on 12/08/2025 at 09:53:02 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35872] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-4435/2025]
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Kanaram S/o Annaram, Aged About 67 Years, Gurlai
Marg, Mandiya Road Pali
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3700/2025
1. Khimaram S/o Rooparam, Aged About 59 Years, R/o
Village Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
2. Thanaram S/o Hakmaram, Aged About 51 Years, R/o
Village Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
3. Bhanaram S/o Rugaram, Aged About 61 Years, R/o
Village Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
4. Dhalaram S/o Ruparam, Aged About 68 Years, R/o Village
Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
5. Mularam S/o Hakmaram, Aged About 56 Years, R/o
Village Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
6. Dhanaram S/o Chogaram, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Village Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
7. Megram S/o Chogaram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Village
Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
8. Chogaram S/o Durgaram, Aged About 81 Years, R/o
Village Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
2. Kanaram S/o Annaram, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village
Sukarlai, Tehsil Rohat, District Pali. (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
(Downloaded on 12/08/2025 at 09:53:02 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35872] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-4435/2025]
12/08/2025
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
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.77/2024, registered at the Police Station Jaitpur District Pali.
5. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under
Sections 384, 149, 406 and 506 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
(Downloaded on 12/08/2025 at 09:53:02 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35872] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-4435/2025]
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
47-48–Hanuman/-
(Downloaded on 12/08/2025 at 09:53:02 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)