The Rajasthan High Court has set aside orders passed by courts in Bikaner that had taken cognizance against two accused persons after rejecting a police closure report. The Court held that while a Magistrate is free to disagree with an investigating officer's conclusions, such disagreement must be supported by clear reasons and a proper examination of the investigation record.
Background of the Case
The matter arose from an FIR registered in Bikaner in 2007. After investigation, the police filed a negative final report, concluding that no case was made out against the accused.
The complainant challenged that conclusion through a protest petition. Acting on the protest petition, the Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of offences alleged in the FIR and issued process against the accused. A revisional court later modified the nature of the process but allowed the proceedings to continue.
Both sides eventually approached the High Court.
Court’s Observations
Justice Farjand Ali noted that the central issue was whether the Magistrate had given adequate reasons for rejecting the police findings.
The Court observed,
“The order must manifest a process of reasoning and not merely the ultimate conclusion.”
According to the judgment, the Magistrate relied largely on allegations repeated in the protest petition and statements placed before the court, but did not meaningfully examine the material gathered during the police investigation.
The High Court said that the closure report contained detailed reasons and factual findings. If those findings were to be rejected, the Magistrate was required to explain why they were unacceptable.
The bench further observed that merely repeating allegations in a protest petition could not replace judicial scrutiny of the investigation record.
Decision
Allowing the petition filed by the accused, the High Court quashed the Magistrate's order dated 28 May 2011 and the revisional court's order dated 9 September 2014. The Court accepted the police negative final report and recalled the warrants issued against the accused.
The complainant's connected petition was dismissed.
Case Details:
Case Title: Manisha Jain v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (Connected with Nawla Ram & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Anr.)
Case Number: S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 2195/2014 and S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 2330/2014
Judge: Justice Farjand Ali
Decision Date: 10 June 2026
