Vijay Bishnoi, J. - (1.) THIS criminal misc. petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer for quashing the FIR No. 114/2014 dated 30.05.2014 lodged at Police Station, Chopasni Housing Board, Jodhpur for the offences punishable under section 380, 323 IPC.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that complainant -respondent No. 2 Namrata Sukhrani lodged the aforesaid FIR No. 114/2014 at Police Station, Chopasni Housing Board, Jodhpur, inter alia, alleging therein that on 30.05.2014, she, along with her son Ishan, went to market to buy some households and when returned to home at about 5:00 -5:30 P.M., she saw the lock of the room removed, door was open and all her belongings were missing. When she asked about this, the petitioners along with cousin sister -in -law of the complainant started beating with her, used swear -words and threatened her to kill. At that time, one Poonam Lalwani was present and when she tried to rescue the complainant, she was asked not to interfere in the matter. It is also alleged that the complainant has received injuries. The police has started investigation into the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR, however, on 16.09.2014, the petitioner have filed this criminal misc. petition challenging the impugned FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the allegations levelled in the FIR are absolutely false and no such incident as alleged in the impugned FIR has taken place on 30.5.2014. It is contended that earlier on 01.10.2014, the Investigating Officer has clearly stated before this Court that as per the CCTV Footage, no incident of theft has taken place on 30.05.2014 as claimed by the complainant and in view of the above fact, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed because the allegations levelled in the same are false. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that various litigations in various courts are going on between the petitioners and the respondent No. 2 and the respondent No. 2 has filed the impugned FIR with ulterior motive. The learned counsel for the petitioners has, therefore, prayed that the impugned FIR may kindly be quashed.
(3.) PER contra, learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that from bare reading of the contents of the FIR, prima facie commission of cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners and it can only be ascertained, after thorough investigation, whether the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR are true or false. Learned Public Prosecutor has, therefore, prayed for dismissal of this criminal misc. petition.;