Sanganer, Jaipur (Rajasthan) v. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor

Judgment

5. State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor. The Director General of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur. The Commissioner of Police, Police Commissionerate, Govt. Hostel, M.I. Road, Jaipur. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Jaipur City (South). The Station House Officer, Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur City (South). ----Respondents

6. Naveen Baheti S/o Jugal Kishor, R/o 40, Pratap Nagar 2, Barkat Nagar, Tonk Phatak, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur. ----Complainant/Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 282/2025

1. Ram Charan Badaya S/o Hanuman Sahai Badaya, Resident of 21-C, Shiv Shankar Nagar, Chak Gator, Sanganer, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

Smt. Hemlata Khandelwal W/o Ram Charan Badaya, Resident of 21-C, Shiv Shankar Nagar, Chak Gator, Sanganer, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

2. Versus State of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Petitioners ---Respondent Naveen Baheti S/o Jugal Kishor, R/o 40, Pratap Nagar-2, Barkat Nagar, Tonk Phatak, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur. ----Respondent/Complainant [2025:RJ-JP:17874] (2 of 5) [CRLMP-1895/2025] For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Anushree Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Madhav Mitra, Sr. Adv. assisted by Ms. Jaya Mitra, Adv. & Mr. Darsh Pareek, Adv. Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, P.P. Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, P.P. Mr. Brij Mohan, C.I., S.H.O. Police Station Shivdaspura, Jaipur, present in person. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 28/04/2025

1. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1895/2025 is filed with a prayer seeking direction for fair, proper, impartial and expeditious investigation in F.I.R. No.986/2024 dated 19.12.2024 registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur City (South) for the offence under Sections 316(4), 61(2)(A), 316(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 282/2025 is filed with a prayer seeking quashing and setting aside of F.I.R. No.986/2024 dated 19.12.2024 registered at Police Station Shivdaspura, District Jaipur City (South) for the offence under Sections 316(4), 61(2)(A), 316(2) of B.N.S., 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents- Mr. Madhav Mitra has apprised this Court that parallel proceedings are initiated by filing S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.268/2025 under the provision of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to de-freeze the account of the petitioners. Further, it is submitted that the Court on erstwhile occasion has directed that a sum of Rupees One Lac be released in favour of the petitioner. [2025:RJ-JP:17874] (3 of 5) [CRLMP-1895/2025]

4. Upon perusal of the material available on record, it is noted that the petitioner-Ram Charan Badaya received a refund of Rs.5 Crores from GST Authorities in the month of December, 2024. Thereafter, the petitioner transferred the said amount to his wife- Hemlata Khandelwal, who is also impleaded as a party.

5. In this backdrop, learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that complainant has lodged the F.I.Rs. bearing Nos.986/2024 & 162/2025 for non-payment and siphoning of money from the bank account and allied reasons. It is further submitted that the petitioner has not paid the loan amount (unsecured) resultant to which multiple F.I.Rs. are apprehended to be lodged or are lodged by different people. Further, it is submitted that there is a possibility that petitioner may abscond with the said money as petitioner is not residing at the place of his residence.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has raised objections qua the contentions of the learned counsel for the complainant and has submitted that dispute herein if of civil nature which is given a criminal colour by the Police Authorities. Moreover, police authorities are hand in glove with the complainant and they are pressurizing the petitioners to enter into a compromise. It is further submitted that on account of the said reason they have wrongfully freezed the bank accounts of the petitioners, without any jurisdiction and powers qua seizure. Further, it is submitted that police authorities are not permitting the petitioner to enter into his premises and petitioners’ son is enlarged on bail, as on date.

7. On an erstwhile occasion, this Court directed the petitioners to furnish the supportive documents i.e., credentials qua GST [2025:RJ-JP:17874] (4 of 5) [CRLMP-1895/2025] refund, income tax returns and so on, in order to adjudicate the matter in hand and arrive at a conclusion qua the fact that whether the same is a recovery transaction or money suit, that petitioner is an employee or not and that the dispute pertains to repayment of unsecured loan.

8. In compliance of the directions passed vide order dated

08.04.2025, Investigation Officer has marked his presence before this Court and has submitted that the petitioner non-cooperation with the investigation post 04.02.2024, lead to the seizure of bank accounts as per provisions of Section 106 of the BNS, to prevent potential absconding.

9. Furthermore, it is submitted that in compliance of the directions of this Court, petitioner marked his appearance before the concerned police station on 09.04.2025, however, details regarding unsecured loans, refunds, transfer of Rs. 5 Crores, and transactions related to commercial plots remain undisclosed.

10. Further, Investigating Officer has assured the Court that investigation in the instant dispute is conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Additionally, it is apprised to the Court that entry of the petitioner in the premises/at the place of residence was never interfered.

11. Having heard and considered the learned counsel for the respective parties and Investigating Officer (present in Court) and taking note of the fact that amount to the tune of Rupees Five Crores is a suspicious figure, that income tax returns placed till 2019 are of no relevance as the amount in dispute pertains to the Year 2022 (15.03.2022), that absence of relevant documents, including those detailing the firm's identity, business nature, and sources of refund, precludes a thorough understanding of the [2025:RJ-JP:17874] (5 of 5) [CRLMP-1895/2025] matter, that there is discrepancy and lack of transparency regarding transaction to the tune of Rupees Five Crores, that the fact that various F.I.Rs. have been lodged by unsecured creditors, as alleged, has not been controverted, this Court is of the opinion that there are no sufficient grounds to warrant interference in the present petitions, nor is there a need to invoke its jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS. Nevertheless, this Court directs the Investigating Authority to conduct free and fair investigation, in accordance with law.

12. Petitioners are directed to co-operate with the Investigation Agency/Authority.

13. Accordingly, the present petitions are dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed of.

14. A copy of this order be placed in the connected file. AMIT/288-289 (SAMEER JAIN),J