MOHAMMAD SHAD KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this criminal misc. petition under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused-petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to quash the FIR No. 395/2022 registered at Police Station Malarna Dungar, District Sawai Madhopur for the offences punishable under Ss. 143, 365 and 384 Cr.P.C and under Sec. 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, qua him.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigating agency has falsely roped the accused petitioner in this case. He submits that as per the FIR, on 15/12/2022, Kamlesh Meena was allegedly taken away by accused Aurangzeb S/o Shri. Khalid Khan, Shahrukh S/o Shri. Hazi Murtuja, Shad S/o Shri. Irshad and four-five other persons and thus, it is apparent that the petitioner is not named in the FIR but the investigating officer, while leaving the actual culprit Shad S/o Shri. Irshad, has falsely roped the petitioner Mohd. Shad S/o Shri. Hasin Khan in this case with an ulterior motive. He submits that the petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged incident. He further contends that even the complainant Harikesh and the victim Kamlesh Meena have clearly stated by way of sworn affidavits that the accused petitioner has falsely been roped in this case by the investigating agency by leaving aside the actual culprit Shad S/o Shri. Irshad and that the accused petitioner was not involved in any manner in the incident happened with Kamlesh Meena on 15/12/2022. Counsel contends that the complainant as well as the victim have also submitted application to this effect to Superintendent of Police, Sawai Madhopur and they do not want any action in pursuance of the above FIR against the petitioner as he is totally innocent. Counsel for the petitioner refers to the reply to the instant misc. petition filed by the respondent No. 2 and 3 and submits that the complainant side has also supported the case of the petitioner and has no objection, if the instant misc. petition is allowed and the impugned FIR is quashed qua the accused petitioner. He thus, prays that the impugned FIR and all other consequential proceedings arising out of it may be quashed qua the present petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the complainant supported the case of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has nothing to do in the incident happened with the victim Kamlesh Meena on 15/12/2022. He also verifies the sworn affidavits of the complainant and victim to be true and correct.