Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2420 (RAJ)

Nischal Bhandari v. State of Rajasthan

2019-09-11

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

body2019
JUDGMENT Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. - This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred for quashing of FIR No.125/2019 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Udaipur for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 406 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the mental state of the complainant is such that she is not in a position to lodge an FIR independently. Counsel for the petitioners further submits that for the same purpose, a representation dated 10.07.2019 has been submitted before the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner however, submits that the petitioners want to submit a representation alongwith all the relevant documents before the concerned investigating authority to redress the issue. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor assures this Court that if the petitioners submit a representation along with all the necessary documents before the concerned investigating authority within a period of ten days from today, then the same shall be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law, before completing the investigation. 5. 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 petitioners submit a representation along with all the necessary documents before it within a period of ten days from today, then the same shall be considered and decided before completing the investigation, strictly in accordance with law. 6. In the peculiar facts of the case, it would be appropriate to grant protection from arrest to the petitioners as it will be a waste of energy and resources of the Police Department to run after the accused to complete the related investigation and without protection it would also cause unnecessary hardship to the accused, who deserve a basic opportunity of explaining their case before the investigating authority without fear of arrest. The investigating officer, however, shall have the liberty of custodial interrogation after giving 15 days' notice before arrest if required. In the interest of justice and the facts and circumstances noted by this Court, the limited protection is justified. Therefore, if during the investigation, the concerned investigating authority needs to arrest the petitioners, then the petitioners shall be given 15 days' notice before making such arrest. The petitioners shall be at liberty to approach this Court again, in case need arises. Therefore, if during the investigation, the concerned investigating authority needs to arrest the petitioners, then the petitioners shall be given 15 days' notice before making such arrest. The petitioners shall be at liberty to approach this Court again, in case need arises. The petitioners shall be required to join the investigation.