SB Crlmp No.1301/10. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL MISC.PETITION NO.1301/2010. Santoshi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of Order : 27/10/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ J. Shri V.S. Chauhan for the petitioner. Shri Peeyush Kumar, Public Prosecutor for State. ****** BY THE COURT:- This criminal misc.petition u/S.482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by petitioner-Santoshi assailing the order of the trial court dated 29/6/2009 taking cognizance in the protest petition filed by the complainant against the petitioner for offence under Section 376/511 IPC. Petitioner filed revision petition against the said order taking cognizance which has also been rejected by the court of sessions vide order dated 14/5/2010. 2) Learned counsel for petitioner has argued that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case inasmuch, there were enmity between the parties and the prosecutrix in her statement as well as prosecution witnesses in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. also did not support the case and that complainant had filed this false case against the petitioner only because they SB Crlmp No.1301/10. 2 did not want to pay loan amount which they taken from him and when petitioner insisted for repaying the loan amount, the complainant lodged false first information report against him. Police ultimately filed negative final report in the competent court against which, complainant filed protest petition, on the basis of which, cognizance has been taken and arrest warrant has been issued against the petitioner. Alternatively, it has been prayed that nevertheless this Court is not persuaded to uphold his first contention, keeping in view this fact that the order taking cognizance was passed long ago on 29/6/2009 and that the final report was already given by the police, arrest warrant issued by that court may be converted into bailable warrant. 3) Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition. 4) Considering the statements of the prosecutrix and the prosecution witnesses, I am not inclined to accept the first contention of the petitioner of quashing order taking cognizance however, in view of the second contention that the final report has been given by the police and this matter has remained pending before this Court for a quite considerable time, I deem it appropriate to grant the second prayer. 5) In the result, this criminal misc.petition u/S.482 Cr.P.C. is partly allowed. Order directing arrest of the petitioner by issue of non-bailable warrant is modified converting the same into SB Crlmp No.1301/10. 3 bailable warrant. Petitioner may furnish bail bonds in the trial court in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court and to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing to face the trial. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil SB Crlmp No.1301/10. 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B.CR.MISC.STAY APPLICATION NO.1152/2010. IN S.B. CRIMINAL MISC.PETITION NO.1301/2010. Santoshi Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of Order : 27/10/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ J. Shri V.S. Chauhan for the applicant-petitioner. Shri Peeyush Kumar, Public Prosecutor for State. ****** BY THE COURT:- Consequent upon disposal of the main petition, this criminal misc.stay application does not survive and the same is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil