Rajasthan High Court
CRLMP/80/2015 of ASHOK PATHAK Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR on 17 August 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 80/2015 CNR: RJHC020546402015 | URN: CRLMP / 152U / 2015 Ashok Pathak S/o Late Shri Rameshwar Prasad, R/o D-3, Nawal Khan Apartment, Bharatmata Path, Jamanalal Bajaj Marg C- Scheme, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus
[2026:RJ-JP:32655]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 80/2015
CNR: RJHC020546402015 | URN: CRLMP / 152U / 2015
Ashok Pathak S/o Late Shri Rameshwar Prasad, R/o D-3, Nawal Khan Apartment, Bharatmata Path, Jamanalal Bajaj Marg C- Scheme, Jaipur
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp
2.
Director General Of Anti Corruption Bureau, Jhalana Institutional Area, Jaipur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Samarth Kumar Jain
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav, PP
Mr. Onkar Singh Rajpurohit, PP
Mr. Shubham Sain, AAAG
Mr. Shiv Charan Gupta with
Mr. Harsh Saraswat and
Mr. Birdhi Lal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
17/08/2026
1. Instant misc. petition is filed by the petitioner with following prayer:- “The Humble petitioner most humbly prays that your lordship may very graciously be pleased to admit and allow this petition and by an appropriate order, Respondents may kindly be directed to enquire into the complaint dated 06.03.2014 as per law.”
2. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted a report and submitted that the complaint submitted by complainant was duly enquired and after enquiry, they have found that no offence is made out, hence, no FIR was registered.
[2026:RJ-JP:32655] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-80/2015]
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that pursuant to judgment in case of Lalita Kumari Vs. State of U.P. AIR 2014 SUPREME COURT 187 by a Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the ACB has to give the report in time after holding an enquiry but they have kept it and the petitioner has not submitted a complaint for registration of FIR.
4. During course of arguments, learned counsel for petitioner offers to withdraw the misc. petition with liberty to avail appropriate remedy available as per law.
5. Accordingly, the misc. petition is dismissed with liberty as aforesaid. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J 49/ANAND