BABU LAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These instant criminal misc. petitions have been preferred by the accused petitioners seeking quashing of FIR No.242/2016 registered at Police Station Jhotwara, Jaipur City (South) for the Offences under Ss. 420, 406, 457, 380 and 120-B IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners and complainant are closed relative. Complainant has lodged the present FIR against the petitioners on wrong facts. As per FIR, it is lodged after inordinate delay of 4-5 months. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that as per FIR, incident of Vishvakarma, Jaipur but present FIR has been lodged in Police Station Jhotwara. So, Police Station Jhotwara has no right to conduct the investigation in this matter. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that complainant in FIR levelled the allegation of theft goods value of Rs.1,57,78,771.00 but he has not submitted any document regarding these goods. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that after investigation, two times FR were proposed but complainant had managed to change the investigation and present Investigating Officer has wrongly found the offence under Ss. 453 and 380 IPC proved. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that present FIR was lodged after statement of Kamlesh which was recorded during the proceedings under Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that there is no eye witness regarding the offence. So, the present FIR be quashed against the petitioners.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the respondent have opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and submitted that after investigation, Investigating Officer has found the offence under Ss. 453 and 380 IPC proved. They further submitted that proceedings under Negotiable Instruments Act are pending since 2012 but the present incident of 2016. They further submitted that previously, Investigating Officer had given a negative final report due to pressure of petitioners. They further submitted that petitioners had appeared before the concerned Investigating Officer for investigation. They further submitted that petitioners went to conclude the trial in proceedings under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. So, the petitions be dismissed.