Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Manoj Maru vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:28216) on 1 July, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:28216]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 4609/2025
Manoj Maru S/o Hanuman Ram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o
Sargaro Ka Bas Village , Nandwan, Police Station Vivek Vihar,
Jodhpur West, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Gunjan Parihar S/o Ramesh Chandra Parihar, R/o
Sardarpura B Road Jodhpur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naman Mohnot
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sri Ram Choudhary, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
01/07/2025
1. By way of filing the present criminal miscellaneous petition
under Section 528 BNSS (Section 482 Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has
prayed for the following reliefs:-
“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully
prayed that this Criminal Misc. Petition may kindly be
allowed and requested to stay on further investigation in
connection with the F.I.R. No.115/2024 has been lodged
against the petitioner in P.S. Mahamandir, District-
Jodhpur city east, Rajasthan and consequential
Proceeding in pursuance of the said FIR for Offence under
Sections 447, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 120-Bof Indian
Penal Code, 1860, may kindly be quashed and set-aside.
Any other appropriate relief, which this Hon’ble
Court deems just and proper in favors of the petitioner,
may kindly be passed.”
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material as made available to this Court as well as gone through
the niceties of the matter.
(Downloaded on 01/07/2025 at 09:39:46 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:28216] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-4609/2025]
3. Having perused the impugned FIR, this Court prima facie
finds that the offences alleged to have been committed by the
petitioners are either triable by a court of Magistrate and/or do not
contain the maximum punishment of more than seven years, and
keeping in mind the provisions contained in Section 35 BNSS
(Section 41, 41-A Cr.P.C.) as well as the judgment passed by
Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs.
State of Bihar, reported in AIR 2014 SC 2756, the dictum of
which squarely apply mutatis mutandis to the present case, it is
directed that in case, the arrest of the petitioner is found to be
absolutely necessary by the Investigating Agencies, instead of
affecting the arrest of the petitioner at once, a prior notice of 20
days shall be given to him so that he may exercise his rights.
Needless to say that the petitioner is not precluded from raising
his grievance before the trial Court.
4. With the aforesaid direction, the misc. petition filed under
Section 528 BNSS (482 Cr.P.C.) as well as stay application are
disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
53-divya/-
(Downloaded on 01/07/2025 at 09:39:46 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)