| 1 |
CRLMP / 5928 / 2024 (CHATAR SINGH CHOUHAN VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 09/10/2024
Petitioner seeks quashing of an FIR u/s 191(2), 115(2), 126(2), 351(2)/(3) and 74 of BNS, 2023. HELD: Perusal of the FIR clearly reveals that the complainant has not suffered any grievous injury. Furthermore, the nature of injury suffered by her was found to be simple and S. 115(2) of BNS has already been invoked. As far as S. 117(2) of BNS is concerned, no ingredients are made out. S. 117(2) of BNS invoked in the FIR is directed to be dropped. Petitions disposed. |
| 2 |
CRLMB / 12292 / 2024 (GOVIND SUKHWAL VS UNION OF INDIA) Date of Order/Judgment: 26/09/2024
Pet. seeks interim bail for attending last 12th day ritual of his deceased grandmother. HELD: Based on humanitarian grounds, and for the interests of justice, interim bail application of the accused-pet. is allowed for a period of 3 days from 28-09-2024 to 30-09-2024, subject to a personal bond of Rs. 5 lakh along with 2 sound sureties each worth Rs. 2.5 lakhs, and one being the relative of the convict and possessing docs. of immovable property in his name. Interim Bail granted. |
| 3 |
CRLMP / 1375 / 2023 (GAJENDRA SINGH SHEKHAWAT VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 25/09/2024
Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR against him u/s 420, 406, 409, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC and Section 65 of IT Act. HELD: Pet. not been named as accused in any of the chargesheets, and No substantive evidence against him found after investigation. U/S 193(9) of BNSS, no further investigation can take place without the permission of the trial court, where a report has already been filed against the prime accused. Petition disposed. |
| 4 |
CW / 15215 / 2024 (NARENDRA KUMAR KHODANIYA VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 23/09/2024
Pet. requests U.O. notice be quashed. HELD:The Inquiry u/s 39(1) of the Act of 2009 was done by a competent authority and regarding later notice, the maxim ‘Delegatus Non Potest Delegare’ cannot be applied to administrative actions. Asstt. Dir. asked Dy. Dir. which is not considered a delegation of power. Pet. is allowed to put his defense qua all the allegations against him before the competent authority within 15 days which shall be considered before passing final order. Pet. dismissed. |
| 5 |
CRLMP / 6309 / 2024 (URVASHI BISHNOI VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 18/09/2024
Petitioner as well as the respondent seeks the quashing of the FIR and proceedings under Sections 341, 323, 354, 509 & 34 of IPC. HELD:For restoring societal peace and familial harmony, the Court stated that the main objective is to strengthen family bonds and not to perpetuate discord among family members. The allegations stem a family scuffle rather than any criminal intent or grievous wrong doing. FIR & all related proceedings quashed; Petitions allowed. |
| 6 |
CRLMP / 4286 / 2024 (PAWAN KUMAR VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 10/09/2024
Petitioner assails the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Sadulshahar regarding allowing interim maintenance to his wife and two minors. HELD: It is the moral & legal obligation of the Petitioner; being a husband as well as the father, to maintain his wife and 2 minor children as wife is unemployed. Ensuring interim maintenance fosters equity and fairness, preventing undue hardships to the Resp./Wife while the case is pending. Petition dismissed. |
| 7 |
CRLMP / 2317 / 2013 (CHHINDER SINGH VS STATE) Date of Order/Judgment: 29/08/2024
Pet. assailing dismissal of rev. petition upholding the trial court order taking cognizance u/s 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. HELD: There was error on the part of the trial court while taking cognizance ignoring the Negative Final Report by IO. Cognizance must be taken after judicious application of mind. No caste-based remarks were made by the pet. at a public place and for disagreeing with IO report, reasoning has to be given. Impugned orders quashed. Pet. allowed. |
| 8 |
CRLMP / 5715 / 2024 (RAMANDEEP @ RAMI VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 27/08/2024
Petitioner aggrieved by the order passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangariya, Hanumangarh, regarding rejection of his application for recording his testimony via video conferencing. HELD: The physical presence of the petitioner in the court hearing must be directed by the Trial Court, only when it is essential, by recording appropriate reasons. Otherwise, Video Conferencing may be allowed as per Video Conferencing Rules framed by the Rajasthan High Court. Petition disposed of. |
| 9 |
CRLMP / 2887 / 2024 (NAINI DEVI @ NENI DEVI @ NEHA VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 27/08/2024
Petitioners seeks quashing of FIR u/s 498-A, 406 and 323 IPC. HELD: Bald allegations lacking any specific particulars do not make out a prima facie case against the Petitioner No. 3 to 6. Allegations appear to have been made with a collateral motive stemming from matrimonial acrimony. FIR quashed qua pet. 3 to 6. Notice u/s 41A CrPC to be given to Pet. No. 1 & 2 if arrest warranted. Petition disposed. |
| 10 |
CRLW / 409 / 2024 (MAHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA (SARASWAT) VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 23/08/2024
Petitioner seeks quashing of a complaint u/s 154 of Cr.P.C. & the resultant notice to appear before ACB. HELD: Despite negative final report filed in previous FIR, the complainant did not file the protest petition. Filing multiple complaints on same set of facts before the Lokpal & ACB is insignificant and amounts to double jeopardy. Such repetitive complaints are misuse of public resources, specifically when already a favourable investigation has concluded.. Petition allowed. |
| 11 |
CRLMP / 5522 / 2024 (VIJAY SHARMA VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 21/08/2024
Pet. seeks quashing of FIR as it is a family dispute & must not involve criminal proceedings. HELD:For the offences committed before 01.07.2024 under IPC an FIR can’t be registered under BNS after enforcement of BNS from 01.07.2024.Any trial,appeal,revision or application commenced after 01.07.2024 will be proceeded as per the procedure of BNSS.No dishonest inducement/entrustment of property.No particulars of forgery of Will. Cri.Law can’t be used to settle civil disputes.Pet. allowed |
| 12 |
CRLMP / 4845 / 2024 (SANGEETA SACHDEV VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 05/08/2024
Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR for the offences u/s 420, 406 and 379 IPC. HELD: FIR is purely matrimonial in nature & registered in complete abuse of the police powers & is motivated to settle personal scores arising out of the differences between husband and wife. Wife entitled to take along personal belongings & her istridhan when leaving matrimonial home. FIR quashed. Petition allowed. |
| 13 |
CRLMP / 5011 / 2024 (PARSHANT VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN) Date of Order/Judgment: 01/08/2024
Petitioner assails Interim maintenance order passed by the Family Court No. 1, Bikaner HELD: No evidence obtained establishing the fact that wife is financially independent; Hence, bears duty on the husband to ensure her financial well-being. Wife cannot be expected to live in sheer penury or be dependent on her parents / or other family members. All rights will be determined at the appropriate final stage. Petition dismissed. |
| 14 |
CRLR / 868 / 2006 (TEJA RAM VS STATE AND ANR.) Date of Order/Judgment: 24/07/2024
Petitioner praying no grant of probation for offences u/s 326 & 447 IPC to resp. no. 2 considering his criminal history. HELD: Grant of probation to resp. no.2 by Appellate Court u/s 4 of Probation of Offenders Act is reasonably justified as per the statute. Today’s criminal justice system is focused upon balancing punishment with rehabilitation along with identifying the root causes of the criminal behavior of such offenders. Petition dismissed. |
