IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1646/2005 Smt. Jagni W/o late Shri Hari Singh Gujar Versus The State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order ::: 21.05.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri R.K. Mathur with Shri Ajay Tantia, Counsel for petitioner Shri M.C. Gupta, Addl. Govt. Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner preferred this writ petition with the following prayer:- “a) Investigating agency and other respondents may kindly be directed to make investigation which is still pending under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C. in relation to involvement of Prabhu Son of Shri Sheo Narayan and after investigation charge sheet may be submitted. b) Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.” The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there was sufficient evidence against co-accused Prabhu S/o Sheo Narayan but no challan was filed against him, therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondents to investigate the matter and file challan against Prabhu also. A show-cause notice was given to the respondents and, in pursuance thereto, reply to the writ petition was filed by the respondents. In Para 7 of the reply, it has been averred that on the basis of the complaint of the petitioner, the investigation of the case was handed over to a police officer of the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police, who made thorough investigation of the case, and, as a result of investigation, it was found that no crime has been committed by Prabhu Singh. The second part of Para 7 of the reply reads as under:- “7. ..... So far as the involvement of Prabhu Singh in the crime, as alleged by the petitioner in its complaint dated 25.09.05 before the I.G. Police, Bharatpur Range, Bharatpur is concerned, it is relevant to mention herein that in order to bring the truth on record regarding the involvement of Prabhu Singh in the crime the investigation of the case was handed over to a Police Officer of a rank of Addtl. Superintendent of Police. After intensive inquiry from Prabhu Singh it has been revealed that the accused Sunil Yadav met Prabhu Singh on the morning of the next day of the incident in Sawan Vatika Hotel. During the course of conversation accused Sunil Yadav informed Prabhu Singh Gurjer that he himself committed the crime along with his brother-in- law, Ajeet Singh and the dead body of the deceased has been concealed in the fields of Bazra. Prabhu Singh did not disclose this very fact for many days but later on disclose the same on moral grounds. This very fact is corroborated from the intensive inquiry of accused Sunil Yadav. Since accused Sunil Yadav made admissions before Prabhu Singh and therefore his admissions being relevant under the provisions of Indian Evidence Act and as such statement of Prabhu Singh u/S 161 of Cr.P.C. was recorded and he was made a witness to the case and in this manner it is not correct to say that Prabhu Singh was also involved in the crime on the contrary as per the evidence available on record Sunil Kumar and Ajeet Singh were the culprits in this case and crime has not been found established against Prabhu Singh.” In view of the above reply filed by the respondents, it is clear that the matter has been examined by the police thoroughly against Prabhu Singh. In fact, the prayer made in the writ petition has become infructuous after completion of investigation against Prabhu Singh. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//