Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2504 (RAJ)

Sumit Shukla v. State Of Rajasthan

2017-11-14

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

body2017
JUDGMENT ORDER Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - The petitioner has preferred this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 for quashing of FIR No.88/2017 registered at Police Station Bhopalpura, District Udaipur for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B of IPC. 2. The allegations are pertaining to a document by which the petitioner received a cheque of Rs. 6,00,000/- for which a proceedings under section 138 of NI Act was already pending. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the allegations at the most attract the proceedings under section 138 NI Act and would not amount to criminal proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that on bare reading of the FIR, the whole offence is pertaining to the cheque issued by the petitioner then the launching of criminal proceedings against him is nothing but pressurizing and harassing the present petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner wants to submit a representation alongwith all the relevant documents before the concerned investigating authority. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor assures this Court that if the petitioner submits a representation alongwith all the necessary documents before the concerned investigating authority within a period of fifteen days from today, then the same shall be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law, before completing the investigation. 6. In light of the aforesaid assurance given by learned Public Prosecutor, the present misc. petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned investigating authority that in case the petitioner submits a representation alongwith all the necessary documents before it within a period of fifteen days from today, then the same shall be considered and decided before completing the investigation, strictly in accordance with law and as per the assurance given by the learned Public Prosecutor. However, if during the investigation, the concerned investigating authority needs to arrest the petitioner, then the petitioner shall be given 15 days notice before making such arrest. The petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court again, in case need arises. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be required to join and completely cooperate with the investigation.