ALOK DHIR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that on identical facts, an FIR bearing No. 605/2017 was registered at Jaipur, wherein the same transaction was questioned and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 23.10.2017 passed in Civil Appeal No. 16929 of 2017 arising out of SLP (C) No. 18195/2017 quashed the FIR No. 605/2017. Learned Senior Counsel submits that even in the present FIR No. 37/2015, the police after investigation has filed the negative final report stating therein that the case is of civil nature. He further contends that the chronology of events shows that the matter is of civil nature and the allegations levelled in the FIR have already been adjudicated right up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same has been decided in their favour. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to appear before the trial court but the petitioners have been summoned by issuing the warrant of arrest straightaway without having been summoned earlier to this.

(2.) Matter requires consideration. Issue notice to the respondents. Mr. S.K. Bhati and Mr. M.S. Bhati, learned Public Prosecutor put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no.1. Mr. Saransh Saini, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. Service is, therefore, sufficient. The petitioners shall supply a copy of the petition along with requisite document to the counsel for the respondents within a period of three days from today.

(3.) I have considered the submissions made at Bar and also gone through the order dated 23/10/2017 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while quashing the FIR No. 605/2017 held as under:-