High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Pushkar S/o Jagdish vs State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 23 August 2017 · Citation: (2017) 08 RAJ CK 0054

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sabina
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=3863>Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973</a>, <a href=3863-482>Section 482</a> - Saving of inherent powers of High Court · <a href=13878>Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953</a>, <a href=13878-33>Section 33</a>, <a href=13878-41>Section 41</a>, <a hre
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
297 of 2015
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

32 paragraphs · 408 words
1.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Code of

Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as '' Cr.P.C .''),

seeking quashing of the FIR No. 384/2014 registered at Police

Station Bayana District Bharatpur for the offence under Section

33, 41 and 42 of Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the

head note of the petition, it has been inadvertently mentioned that

FIR has been registered at Police Station Bayana District

Bharatpur for the offence under Sections 2(26)(27)(29) of Wild

Life Protection Act, 1972 whereas the FIR has been registered only

qua offence under sections 33, 41 and 42 of Rajasthan Forest Act,

1953.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this

petition is covered by the decision given by this court in SB Cr.

Misc. Petition No. 2002/2015 titled as Mousam Khan Vs.

State of Raj. & Anr. Decided on 29.04.2015.

4.

Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the

petition.

5.

Mousam Khan has sought quashing of the FIR registered

against him by filling SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.2002/2015. The said

petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2015. It

was held as under:-

"Thus, it is apparent that offence under section 41/42 of the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 is non-cognizable offence and petitioner can only be prosecuted by filling a complaint by the authorised/competent Officer. No FIR in the present case, could have been registered. Further, Police Officer concerned has not obtained permission from the Magistrate concerned for investigation of the offence. In view of the above, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of the impugned FIR cannot be sustained and are liable to be set aside. Consequently, the present petition is accepted and the impugned FIR is quashed along with all subsequent proceedings. However, liberty is granted to the competent authorised Officer to file a complaint in accordance with the provisions of law, if it is not barred by limitation."

6.

Present case is covered by the decision given by this Court

in SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.2002/2015 decided on 29.04.2015.

7.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Consequently, FIR No.

FIR No. 384/2014 registered at Police Station Bayana District

Bharatpur for the offence under Section 33, 41 and 42 of

Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 and all subsequent proceedings

arising therefrom are quashed. However, complainant would be

at liberty to file a complaint with regard to alleged offence, if so

advised.